Lurker > legendary_zell

Personal anecdotes are facts now? No wonder you are so misguided, you're mistaken about the basic building blocks of what makes good evidence or a good argument.

I'm black, I've met more black people than you, and have more understanding of black culture than you. My personal anecdotes are more facts. In fact they're more facty than yours. You see why this is a horrible mode of argument?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

JACKBUTTMOMMY posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Like are you serious, using workers at the lunch counter to speak about the black community at large? Random passersby on the street? It's telling that these are the examples you use. It doesn't sound like you have much interaction with black people. It was already pretty obvious that your views didn't come from knowing or talking to black people.

It doesn't apply to all black people. At the same time, it can be a striking amount. I've worked at a NPO in the inner city for 5 years. When I'd take surveys to see how the community itself wants to grow and prosper, a lot of the people I interviewed were 20ish, smoking blunts on their stoop, and would ask, "What's in it for me?" I.E. They'd usually want a gift card as compensation for their time.

Entitlement and bad attitudes are issues within the community. It doesn't make them ALL that way, but it also doesn't make it a factor that should be ignored.

On the flip side of the coin, there are many black people who actually come out, volunteer, vote, come to community meetings, take surveys, raise money, work hard (sometimes more than one job), have good attitudes, etc. It's really the normalizing of bad attitudes and entitlement that causes a lot of dispair, in my mind, and it is a learned trait - quite similar to racism.

And yes, I do acknowledge that the attitudes and traits exist in other communities and cultures as well. At the same time, the rates do not seem to be as high. Granted, my experiences aren't an accurate portrayal or study of the environment as a whole.

Thanks for this post. I appreciate your experiences. One thing to note that is that the population you ran into is just one part of the black community. There's many other parts. Which you recognize. But another factor is you're talking to the most downtrodden people in American Society. If you go to a crappy Indian Reservation or a meth town in Appalachia, you'll see the same attitude. It's a reaction to despair, not the cause (though it doesn't help, I agree). You'll see it anywhere without jobs, education, etc.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Like are you serious, using workers at the lunch counter to speak about the black community at large? Random passersby on the street? It's telling that these are the examples you use. It doesn't sound like you have much interaction with black people. It was already pretty obvious that your views didn't come from knowing or talking to black people.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Vindris_SNH posted...

TommyG663513 posted...

Vindris_SNH posted...

That_Happened posted...

Vindris_SNH posted...

with a culture that teaches them to be lazy and blame other people for their problems.

When you get off the internet and go outside, you realize there are very few impoverished people who do this. Working class people (both black and white) are proud af of hard work.

Actually, I work in an area filled with these kinds of people. When I get off the internet and go outside, I see exactly what I'm talking about happening, and it seems worse than the internet says it is.

I see black people roaming the streets in the ghetto in the afternoon here as I'm going to lunch. A lot of them. Unless they all work 2nd or 3rd shift, they're not working. These are 20-50 year old able bodied people, doing absolutely nothing. And then when I go to an establishment to order food for lunch, most of the black people "working" there take their sweet ass time taking my order and getting it ready. You can see a general lack of enthusiasm for any kind of work they're doing. Their level of customer service is usually awful.

So, no, it's not about things I've heard, this is about real life experience. Not racism, or stereo types. This is the real world that I see every day.

Yup nothing racist about your post whatsoever...

I'm not sure how my real world observations of what actually happens can possibly be racist. Please explain.

Well for one, you're heavily generalizing your limited and filtered interactions with black people you don't know to sweeping statements about some kind of pathology in the black community. You don't know anything about these people, you're simply using them to confirm your preexisting negative view of black people.

Forgive me for not thinking you're neutral on this subject. If ANYONE said about white people what you just said about black people, you'd be howling about anti white racism.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Vindris_SNH posted...

legendary_zell posted...

You're asking all poor black people to be extraordinary when others do not have to be.

No. I'm offering insight into the heart of the issue, and I'm offering moral support for all impoverished people who have been inundated with a culture that teaches them to be lazy and blame other people for their problems.

I think what the impoverished black community needs more than anything is a re-adjustment of culture. But they have to change their attitudes toward "whitey" first. We're not trying to keep them down. We're trying to help them. But giving handouts has done nothing but create an attitude of entitlement.

What privileged people need to do is come together in unanimous support of impoverished communities. Not necessarily monetary support, but moral support. We need to be active in their lives. We should each be playing a small but important role. To be a good example, and to be kind. We need to make available to them the tools that are necessary for success.

And the thing is, I think a lot of this has already been done, but much of the impoverished black community has refused to see it, because their culture has taught them to fight the power, fight the power, and then fight the power some more. They have a serious disconnect with reality. They can't see that those with wealth and power have been trying to help them, even if it's in some misguided way. Yet they still claim the people that are trying to help them are the ones trying to bring them down.

I'm rambling a bit, but I digress...

The fact is, the impoverished black community needs to reevaluate their culture and their attitudes. And you know what? You're right. That will take at least one generation of extraordinary black people, a generation to set things straight. And I think that generation will be the Millennials. But that is a change that must occur within the impoverished black community itself. There is nothing, or at least not much, that the outside forces can do to help that along.

There's just so much wrong with this post. You seem to be acting like some kind of expert on black culture. Like some weird mix between a therapist and a priest for those wayward blacks. Like what black people really need is to just stop blaming whitey and some "moral support" from the rest of the community.

Your rhetoric is pretty much indistinguishable from racist stereotypes about black work ethic. It's not grounded in reality. Where is the evidence of it? Where is the evidence that "black culture" gives people the values you're saying it does. Where is the attitude of entitlement?

It's also telling how your solution is simply the withdrawal of entitlements and criticism of this nebulous culture. It's definitely not money or resources or extension of genuine opportunity, it's about activity in our lives? What does that even mean?

I mean just listen to the way you talk about black people, just in this message. They are lazy, brainwashed, blind to reality, victim minded, morally deficient, ignorant of just how hard wealthy people have been trying and trying to help them? Just listen to yourself, dude. You talk like this and then wonder why people don't like it or call you racist? How is that crap distinguishable from what a racist would say, other than the lack of an N-bomb. Just saying you're being real or non-PC doesn't explain that away.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Vindris_SNH posted...

Vindris_SNH posted...

Many people are too focused on finding racism in everything, placing blame, and not nearly focused enough on hard work and personal responsibility.

Until racism no longer exists in our society, any race being treated unfairly should fight for total equality. But what has happened in our culture is that many people are under the impression that it is impossible for them to get anywhere in life because of this supposed overt racism that is occurring. They have it in their heads that it's not even worth trying, and they focus all of their energy on raging against issues that are not nearly as pervasive as they think they are.

In short, it's just an excuse that gets used by people who don't feel like putting forth much effort into creating success for themselves.

My hope is that our culture can move away from this, that the liberal media will stop pandering to the black community, and that we can work together to develop a culture of people who are willing to work hard to accomplish their goals, even in an environment that isn't completely fair.

You are reposting and reposting this but it's little more than a conservative caricature of black people. I have never heard any black person say the things conservatives regularly attribute to us. No one thinks it's impossible to succeed. Even in the days of slavery, there were minority "success stories". They say nothing about the fairness of the overall system. There will always be outliers, but the main question is whether the system is fair for the vast majority of group X.

You accuse others of looking to find racism, but you seem just as guilty of reflexively minimizing it and its importance to stick to a toxic combination of "they're just whiners" and "bootstraps" mentality. You think it's the media that makes black people think they have it bad, not all of American history and reality. Like we'd be just fine and dandy if that darn media wouldn't point out that pesky redlining and persistent defacto school segregation and lack of generational wealth.

The reality is 95% of people out there are trying just as hard as anyone but some face far more obstacles than others. When those obstacles exist, people need to be extraordinary to overcome them. You're asking all poor black people to be extraordinary when others do not have to be. Black people are and have only ever claimed to be EQUAL to other groups. To do what you seem to expect, they'd have to be superior to everyone else, and they're not. They are just like everyone else. No group of any race or upbringing is as extraordinary as they'd need to be to exist in your world. Like another poster said, the vast majority of people are average, with average values, and they put in average effort, regardless of their circumstances. The difference is that some people start off so far behind that that won't get you very far.

You're setting up an impossible bar for a group of people and then accusing those people of having a victim mentality or not wanting to succeed when they inevitably fail to meet that unrealistic bar. Then you say that you acknowledge circumstances aren't equal and I'm assuming you'd acknowledge that some people have it materially worse based on a combination of race and class. But it seems like you'd also attack any attempt to actually point to one of those materially different circumstances as a reason for a lack of success. So there's no real way to win other than to buy into bootstraps mentality like Freeman, regardless of reality or the consequences.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Clad posted...

No. It's exaggerated, just like the gun violence is.

What proof do you have of this? People have posted things that strongly indicate the opposite. I mean over 10k per person and growing is quite a lot. Paying several times what other countries pay for routine procedures is expensive. Paying private prices for high deductible insurance instead of paying through savings or taxes is expensive AF. Wage reductions for healthcare are expensive.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Broseph_Stalin posted...

I Like Toast posted...

There's a reason why the super wealthy fly to America for care.

The super wealthy fly everywhere for care depending on what specialist they want to see, this is a really tired argument.

Exactly. People fly to India to get specific procedures done with equivalent to better outcomes than those done in American hospitals, and for way cheaper. Does that mean they have the best system?

The ability to do specific things really well or having access to state of the art equipment does not necessarily make a system the best. A system is composed of much more than that. Care is generally pretty nice almost everywhere in the world when you're rich enough, so that can't be the measure of the best system. Things like cost, access, rationality, and choice have to be the true measures of the best system. And ours is bad to horrible at all of those except choice.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

It's much higher than most people believe. Huge amounts of your paycheck are taken for healthcare related stuff. Then you have the high premiums and high deductibles of many plans right now. Drugs, health supplies, and services cost more than they do elsewhere. You can have an surgery that costs 10k in one place and 80k in another for no reason. Hospital prices for goods and services are almost pulled out of thin air and always increasing, and they serve as the starting point for negotiations with insurance companies, so that means inflated prices for everyone.

It's an absolute mess.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

WTF, the NBA is incredibly diverse. I has people from all over the world and people of every race, religion, and ethnicity. What a horrible example. It's second only to soccer in diversity.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Project5Boss posted...

ArchiePeck posted...

"We want nothing to do with women, yet are going to obsessively discuss our failures with them and project blame onto an entire sex for our own shortcomings."

That's a lovely strawman you've created for yourself. I'm MGTOW and I too question the motives of some other MGTOW but you know what that's a good thing. It isn't a hivemind movement. Some MGTOW are monk, others like me still have relations with women(as risky as that is).

However the facts are that modern western women are over-privileged. They get to have all the rights men have while still retaining the "fairer sex" card. A woman can be a CEO yet still expect to be catered to and taken care of by an even more successful man. Women have full control over reproduction, once she's pregnant she has full control over the fate of the kid. She can either kill it or use it to take your money.

Women have full control over sex, I personally have no wish to force sex on women but now they can literally regret sex and accuse a guy of rape which is insanity.

They get lighter sentences for the same crime, female sex offenders aren't seen as the creeps and villains men are. Women are seen as the best care givers of children when women by far commit more violence against children. There's entire channels dedicated to news stories of women murdering or abusing their own children or someone else's.

Stating the facts about a group =/= hating them or blaming them for your own failure. This is a similar problem with the black community anytime someone mentions how dys-freaking-functional we are(I am black). Just like Blacks pissed away all their potential in the 60s when black women hopped on the welfare train. It's the same as how once women got voting rights we got a massive welfare state and are up to our scalp in debt.

However gfaqs is mostly a leftist hellhole devoid of any acknowledgement of social observations so I fully expect this post to either get me modded or attacked by the hordes.

You act like you have some special social insights or perspective but you're literally just posting various right wing talking points verbatim. Your post could be interchangeable with any post on the cesspool part of reddit, and yet we're the hoarde?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

BTW, The Admiral is actually completely right on the law here. It seems like the difference here is whether these agreements should be put in contracts for low level employees and then invalidated through expensive legal action that leaves the employee in a very disadvantageous position due to an unnecessary and exploitative provision. Or if employers should just stop squeezing their employees in yet another way.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

booboy posted...

Anyone not at an executive level or dealing with classified information shouldn't ever be forced to sign a non-compete clause.

---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

DeroIin posted...

Tinder game Steph Curry

(Are you that UT pre-law dude?)

No, I think that's me. And I'm actually about to graduate in a few days. Actually, maybe you're talking about someone else.

TCs methods are not my style but his results are crazy compared to mine. I really don't get it.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

I've seen tons of mean comments on there. Yes, that's the point. Yes, people are meaner to more attractive people. Yes, people are meaner to those they perceive as seeking attention. Those are some of the funniest to look at. But there is a big difference between harsh one liners and the things that were said and done in this specific case. One is business as usual, the other is a storm of bitterness and creepiness.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

I don't think there's too many white people. I think there's not enough of others, especially Asians. But it's a problem for most minorities. There's so many stories out there to be told as Fences, Atlanta, Get Out, Blackish, Insecure, Master of None, Fresh Off the Boat,Moonlight, etc prove. These stories can succeed when given a legit chance. If you don't wanna give minorities a chance to lead major, big budget stuff, then stories like these need to be produced far more often.

Furthermore, it's also pretty messed up that non-whites are severely limited in the availability of generic/good roles and growth potential in their careers. Majority or no majority, rationalization or no rationalization, that is unfair and whatever can reasonably be done to lessen unfairness should always be done.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Keith_Valentine posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Don't listen to the bitter MFers on this board. Stay far away from all that redpill and MGTOW garbage. Going in that direction would lead to you becoming a worse person instead of just revealing her character.

Similarly, don't go for any type of revenge as that just brings you down. Revenge will just turn this into a dramatic saga and you'll lose the moral high ground you should have.

Don't waste someone else's time by using them as a rebound or revenge unless you're very upfront about it because that's just a crappy thing to do.

You should take stock of your life and where you are. Focus on yourself and self improvement for awhile. It could be in terms of friendships, jobs, hobbies, fitness, whatever, but do something positive and growth oriented. Don't wallow, don't look back, don't look down on yourself. Become a better person for yourself and eventually it'll become clear how it wasn't your fault and how this is a chance to get something real in the future.

This is what redpill is all about. I agree some mgtow go too far, the women haters. I don't follow that, I like women. I just am careful..

That's the spin they try to put on it to sucker in men with low self esteem who are prone to bitterness in a moment (or lifetime) of weakness. But in reality, it's about creating an oppositional, hateful relationship between men and women. It becomes a contest of control and "domination" which is to be won through manipulation. Women become a ridiculous hivemind that are simultaneously loathsome and the focus of life. It's a crappy life tutorial for people who are not well adjusted human beings.

TC doesn't need any of that. He needs to continue to be a well adjusted human. That will always be the best route in life.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Don't listen to the bitter MFers on this board. Stay far away from all that redpill and MGTOW garbage. Going in that direction would lead to you becoming a worse person instead of just revealing her character.

Similarly, don't go for any type of revenge as that just brings you down. Revenge will just turn this into a dramatic saga and you'll lose the moral high ground you should have.

Don't waste someone else's time by using them as a rebound or revenge unless you're very upfront about it because that's just a crappy thing to do.

You should take stock of your life and where you are. Focus on yourself and self improvement for awhile. It could be in terms of friendships, jobs, hobbies, fitness, whatever, but do something positive and growth oriented. Don't wallow, don't look back, don't look down on yourself. Become a better person for yourself and eventually it'll become clear how it wasn't your fault and how this is a chance to get something real in the future.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

DevsBro posted...

The best part was when you get to the world map for the first time... especially if you're somehow going into it blind and have come to assume that the whole game would be in Midgar.

Dat music.

I always feel emotional at this part, even after 20 years and countless playthroughs. That music is amazing and just running in circles fighting those motorcycle monsters you can learn magic missile from...

I would definitely do another playthrough because of this topic if it wasn't for finals and that pesky bar exam.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger MUSHROOM MUSHROOM
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

His picture has been posted all over every piece of media. They've given his full name, school, everything. What more do you want? It seems like you are mad that black people aren't being portrayed negatively enough in the media for your tastes.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Asherlee10 posted...

legendary_zell posted...

It's interesting that this is coming closer and closer to reality because my final writing assignment in my first year of law school was about the legality of a female only driver service under sex discrimination laws.

Would you be willing to share of the points you addressed?

Sure. So I ended up writing on the side of the hypothetical person opposing the legality of the driver service. That has strongly colored my views because I haven't rigorously thought about the other side.

Discrimination law is a general prohibition on sex discrimination which includes hiring bans or hiring exclusively hiring one gender over another. But that's not the end of the story. Title VII allows even blatant sex/gender discrimination if it is essential to the business and gender is a bona fide occupational qualification (a technical term).

So the debate focuses on what the business is exactly. If it's generally defined as "the taxi business", a female only driver service would be in trouble. If it's defined as "a taxi business that caters to clientele x", then that's more favorable to the taxi service. You would be debating whether that extra service/benefit of peace of mind is essential to the business.

Then you'd move on to whether gender based classifications are the only practicable/reasonable way to achieve that. If it is, that would make being female a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ). If you can find other ways to achieve the same peace of mind, then the service is in trouble, if you can't, they're probably fine. But the "essential to the business" part and "BFOQ" part overlap here because there's a core question about whether it's a valid goal to have a woman only business for people like rape survivors where its simply the status of being a male that makes people uncomfortable with male drivers, not anything the guy has done. There's a question whether a business can choose to open a business to serve these people and thus define that peace of mind as essential to the business when they know that will inevitably lead to blatant gender discrimination
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

RIdeAustin offers options for female only drivers. But its available to both men and women and I don't know of anyone who has actually taken advantage of the offer.

It's interesting that this is coming closer and closer to reality because my final writing assignment in my first year of law school was about the legality of a female only driver service under sex discrimination laws.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Only the first incident of this and one bomb threat have been confirmed. The banner is not confirmed and I'm not seeing a source for the message or additional stabbings.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

.....I agree with TC 100%......
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Light brown desert boots/chukkas and dark brown Sperry's. Occasionally some grey canvas nikes.

For business, I'm a big fan of brown dress shoes but I occasionally wear black ones.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Who even cares about this "franchise"? A few months after it came out? Now? And in freaking 2020?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Have you ever posted about gay rights or even said anything positive about LGBT people when it wasn't in connection with criticizing Muslims?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

So ice cream is included, but pie is excluded? What's the logic behind that? These restrictions are pointless and cruel and can't be made on a rational basis.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

That's completely different than this situation. A closer analogy would be if people truly believed that those without a moat around their house wanted to be robbed and people refused to criticize the robbers.

As pinky said, most people do take precautions they shouldn't have to take. This topic was about whether it's their fault when someone does something bad because of how they're dressed and the answer is no, period. This is about what should happen, not what does happen in this imperfect world.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Also freedom of speech has nothing to do with private harassment so that whole line of argument is dead in the water.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

I'm not suggesting that people be arrested for catcalling. That's more for the worse forms of harassment, like following people home, touching them, etc. The key is that these negative behaviors can be reduced when there's strong social agreement that they're wrong. That applies to all of the isms. No they can't be fixed quickly because they're deeply rooted in society but progress is made only when people don't say "the world is just unfair, that's the way it is, deal with it". That has never been a productive mindset.

We COULD make sensitivity training mandatory if people took the problem seriously. And they should, because these people can make just going outside uncomfortable or scary for a huge portion of the population. But the fact that they've already internalized these attitudes and it's hard to change them, or to even get the leverage to change them if they could be changed is why I've said it's too late for a lot of them. Doesn't mean we just accept their behavior or push it onto women to stop it though.

You are suggesting something that isn't solving the problem and is actually perpetuating it. Putting it on women to change reinforces the idea that it really isn't men's fault when they do dumb stuff because the woman should have covered up. My approach is slower, but it addresses the core issue, rather than covering it up.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

It's like what we're doing with any other socially harmful attitudes, whether its racism, homophobia, or sexism in this case. You educate people over time about the acceptable ways to treat people and you don't stay silent or blame the victim when something racist/sexist/homophobic happens. You don't just accept how things are or how they have been.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

That_Happened posted...

legendary_zell posted...

You should be calling to change a very changeable unfair thing

"A very changeable thing" yet this has been going on forever, and it's only gotten better as time goes on. Women are probably harassed less today than they've ever been. But i don't think it'll ever completely go away.

So give me some examples of how you change this behavior in construction workers and homeless guys who probably aren't going on the internet to read this thread and aren't going to be taking a seminar at the local college.

Well for one we could NOT blame the women when we hear about stories like that. People could stop defending catcalling. We could hold the guys that do it fully accountable with social, civil, or even criminal sanctions. We could educate these guys about self control (probably too late for them, really). If none of that fixes it, we could eradicate the mindset that it's the responsibility of women to cover up or face harassment by unaccountable men. It would take time, but it would work slowly, and the less it happened, the harder it would be to defend it when it does happen. But that would require people to change the attitudes expressed in this topic.

That's much better than criticizing women, defending the behavior of these guys, or throwing our hands up and simply saying "life isn't fair and accepting the status quo". That's what's truly unacceptable.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

That_Happened posted...

legendary_zell posted...

men are pursuers and cannot be expected to control themselves or be blamed for the failure to do so.

I'm just gonna let you rant because you're clearly not listening. Don't know how many tines I have to say "those men are awful and dangerous" before you'll actually hear me.

The men are to be blamed for their actions. They are terrible often dangerous people. But if women want to minimize harassment they're going to have to take steps themselves. Again it's not fair, but that's life.

How can you blame someone for something but then shift the blame to someone else for correcting it the problem the first person caused? You say catcalling is completely unjustified and uncalled for, but it's up to women to stop it, not the catcallers and harassers? Men are the only ones with direct control over harassment. It takes less effort to simply not be creepy than it does to judge what level of clothing will allow you to be attractive but will dissuade creeps from creepin.

You should be calling to change a very changeable unfair thing rather than calling on victims of unfairness to change their completely innocuous behavior. How will guys learn to be respectful if society teaches it's actually on women to change. There's lots of places where there's essentially no harassment, why not try to figure out what they're doing right rather than chalk it up to testosterone and limit women's freedom?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Basically, this is a social problem, not a biological problem, and its a widespread one based on my experiences, the experiences of the women I know, and this topic. The core issue is that people continue to have toxic attitudes toward women and women's sexuality.

Men are men and women are women everywhere, but some places have far higher rates of harassment, assault, etc than others, even where women dress "modestly". (See parts of India, the Middle East, and Africa). Why is that? Because of the exact attitudes in this topic. Women are the guardians of sexuality while men are pursuers and cannot be expected to control themselves or be blamed for the failure to do so. Instead, the women are blamed for failing to take sufficient steps to protect their chastity in the eyes of men. This attitude is shared by both harassers and non-harassers. Different levels of protection are needed in different places. In some places, anything less than a full body covering triggers the "I'm a man, and you aren't protecting yourself enough defense/reaction", whereas it takes a little more in the west, but it all stems from the same source.

That source is toxic.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

That_Happened posted...

legendary_zell posted...

You guys seem to be blatantly excusing men like seeing skin makes us involuntary be assholes.

Most of us can control ourselves. But there are plenty of men (many of them mentally ill like I said earlier) who can't.

And seeing skin doesn't make a man become an asshole but when we're biologically hardwired to get turned on by that stuff and we're full of testosterone, expecting zero men to react to a ton of cleavage and a skimpy skirt is fucking stupid.

The guys who catcall aren't absolved of responsibility. Those people are awful. But the women who expect literally no one to notice or comment on their outfits or hit on them are living in a dreamworld. It's like women who don't understand why a school would have a dress code for girls--if you don't get that boys are going to be distracted by girls who show too much skin (and if you also don't get that this is a REASONABLE BIOLOGICAL reaction) then you simply don't understand the world. Note: again I'm not saying that catcalling or harassment is somehow "ok". The people who do that are awful. But guys are going to ask you out. Guys are going to try to get your phone number. They're going to try to get a date.

Calling it a reasonable biological reaction is exactly the problem. We expect people to control their urges all the time, and blaming women when someone doesn't is BS. Being turned on doesn't automatically lead to anything other than being turned on. Anything someone does in response to that is under their control and is their responsibility, not that of the person who turned them on just by existing without sufficient layers of clothing on. That's on them, not on women who "don't understand" that some guys are mindless douches. This is literally the same line of argument that people use to justify restrictions on women's clothing in the Sharia Law jurisdictions. Some guys can't control themselves, so women must take precautions to avoid provoking wild, lustful men who just can't help but be turned on by a girl in shorts.

I don't think there's many women who aren't aware that some men don't care to control themselves. They are just rightfully pissed off that society (and CE) gives those men a pass by talking about it in biological terms or putting the onus on women to change how they dress, rather than men to not act like a dog in heat. It says that it's okay to treat people differently in a negative manner, based on what they wear and that its her fault, not the guy. We talk about the woman being a whore or bringing it upon herself, not how the guy is dangerous because he can't control his actions at the sight of a woman who isn't wearing an arbitrary amount of clothing as determined by society and that individual guy.

I mean that's exactly what you have on CE. You have people saying its okay to treat a woman in a way she doesn't want to be treated based on her clothing choices and that she has a responsibility to change how she dresses if she does not want negative treatment. That's psycho, and yet most of the people here argue aggressively in favor of that.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Where's CE's calls for personal responsibility and behavior change for entitled people who apparently literally can't control their eyes and mouths? Why are they being absolved of responsibility that's actually 100 percent theirs?

In CE's view it's your fault if someone harassed you if you choose to wear certain things, it's just something that magically happens, with no agency on the part of the guys who do it and it's the responsibility of women not to provoke men into acting like baboons?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

You guys seem to be blatantly excusing men like seeing skin makes us involuntary be assholes. Some of you are even defending catcalling and yet you claim you aren't sexist and society isn't screwed up when it comes to sexuality.

There is absolutely nothing about skimpy clothing that is forcing anyone to stare or be a creep. That's on you, not her. It comes from you entirely. You could just be a respectful human being but you choose not to be because you feel entitled to make someone else uncomfortable because of your personal views on clothing and sexuality.

To say someone else is at fault like you can't control yourself because you saw a little skin is pathetic and yet people are claiming it's the women who are opposed to being harassed for their clothing choices that lack responsibility? This board is an absolute cesspool.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

EdwardoMario16 posted...

Is it her fault? You know what? No it isn't her fault. She's basically admitting she's a spoiled child and therefore not responsible for anything that happens to her.

She is NOT responsible. And not in the way some might think.

So instead of placing the accountability on her, we should take accountability off of her. She should not be allowed to be alone on the street by herself. Just like how you wouldn't leave a child alone, she should not be left alone without adult supervision.

You seem to be trying to make some kind of point, but all you've done is discredit yourself.

Anyway, anything beyond respectful glances and attempting to have actual conversations (and giving up respectfully if they're not welcome) is wrong regardless of what any human being is wearing. It's possible to just want to look good without opening yourself up to being accosted by every person with male genitalia. People are not always dressing up for that type of attention.

But because of our culture, so many guys don't seem to get that. They think everything is catered towards them and get offended when they find out its not. They see a girl who's not dressed like a nun and think that's a greenlight for all forms of creepitude. Because she didn't "cover up", she obviously wants to experience a bunch of negative things on the spectrum from creepy stares, to groping, to being followed, to rape. That's why people connect all these things, from staring and catcalling, to more extreme behavior. It all comes from the same dangerous mindset of "she's wearing x so I'll treat her a certain way".

This stuff isn't hard, but many people in this topic are wildly off the mark and are exhibiting the exact type of mindset that makes all my female friends scared to take public transportation or walk around at night. Pretty much all of them, experience some creepy ass stuff, I've seen it happen in front of me. And its clear it comes from this mindset.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Why are we worried about refugees? Clearly Florida men are the biggest threat to society.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

This shouldn't even be joked about. How would your parents feel if they saw you saying stuff like this online?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Darkman124 posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Is this 45% of your total income or a 45% marginal tax?

this is one of the secrets of conservative bullshitting: present maximum marginal tax rates as effective tax rates and strip out all deductions

it's a great scare tactic

Yes, it's honestly amazing how often they do this and how often they don't get called out on it. But many of them legit don't seem to understand the difference. I've had otherwise extremely intelligent conservatives argue with me about taxes as if they were the same thing.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

GigaSPX posted...

Nukleen posted...

Kazuma_Yagami posted...

You're a spoiled brat if you think 150K isn't rich.

That's a very interesting viewpoint.

And this all falls back to the arguments made back and forth about what defines as "rich".

Anyway for the poll topic, being taxed 45% of what you make is robbery. It kills the incentive to working to where you would be to earn that much money to be nearly slashed in half because everyone else who intentionally abuse government assistance is pretty much stealing away from you. $150k is a lot of money, but it really depends on where you are and how much standard of living is there. Which I don't have to explain since it's been pointed out very well already in this thread.

How is it "killing" the incentive when you're still making more money? You are getting more and can buy nicer things. 150k is better than 120k regardless of tax brackets. But that raises a question. Is this 45% of your total income or a 45% marginal tax?
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Xelltrix posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Or at least that's what I thought before I checked the polls

Our conversation hasn't been related to the poll in a while, lol.

Not the poll in this topic. Opinion polls on what people think "rich" means. But its actually based on income. The more you currently make, the more you think it requires to be rich. Which makes me think it has no fixed, objective meaning, it simply means "an arbitrary amount more than I currently make" in most people's minds.

I think my definition makes more sense. It's main flaw is that the specific way I talked about it doesn't include like LA, DC and NYC. Those are pretty much the only places where 150k wouldn't be enough to live like a king while saving a ton.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

meingott posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Can the people saying 150k for ONE person isn't rich explain themselves? By my calculations, even with the 45% tax rate, that would get you a luxury apartment in downtown Houston/Austin/Dallas, a brand new car, and all expenses paid without even approaching half of your monthly income spent. I would think that would be rich to the vast majority of people.

So basically, because you get to finance a bunch of shit you think it makes you rich?

That is how most people think of things. Unless your definition of rich is being able to buy everything outright with no financial strain, even in the most expensive of markets. That's fine if that's your definition, but most people would consider others rich far before they reached that level.

Or at least that's what I thought before I checked the polls. I was actually wrong. It seems people actually agree with you. I still think that's an abuse of the word though. If you're in the 98th percentile of income and can live straight up irresponsibly in a major metro area without even coming close to straining financially, that's rich to me.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

That's the 98th percentile nationally guys. Texas is the second most populous state and a place lots of people are moving to. Even if you change it to Chicago, that's still a ton. That's what a big firm lawyer used to get paid, you'd be hard pressed to find non-CE contrarians who didn't consider that rich.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif

Can the people saying 150k for ONE person isn't rich explain themselves? By my calculations, even with the 45% tax rate, that would get you a luxury apartment in downtown Houston/Austin/Dallas, a brand new car, and all expenses paid without even approaching half of your monthly income spent. I would think that would be rich to the vast majority of people.
---

http://i.imgur.com/0Bi86cp.gif