Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging

[Art Kassul]

Stanley McChrystal on the Military, Leadership, and Risk (Ep. 134)

Why it’s crucial to take a long view of history.

conversationswithtyler.com

Stanley McChrystal on the Military, Leadership, and Risk​

COWEN: When do you think the United States will have women as truly senior commanders in its armed forces? And how would you manage that transition? What would you do?

MCCHRYSTAL: We already have some, so it’s moved along pretty well. But to understand why it hasn’t moved faster is, for many years early in my career, the jobs that were given to female officers, even though they may have been just as talented — you went to a military base, the protocol officer was always a female. So they would put them off in these jobs, and when we get time to select them for higher-level responsibility, their records of experience didn’t match their male counterparts.

Now, it wasn’t their fault, but the reality is, when you made that decision, they actually didn’t compare. Really, you have to have a period of affirmative action. You have to promote some senior women, and you need to accept risk in that because they will be less prepared than some of their peers. You say, “Well, that’s too risky for the nation.” I think it’s too risky not to.

Now, you’re only going to have to do that for about a generation because you have to provide senior-level examples to younger female officers to help them get up there. Without any, it’s really hard to continue the progress. We’ve seen a lot, but it still has a long way to go.

Spoiler: you may also like

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

 

[LurkNoMore]

"Pragmatic" leftist makes comment about vague but reasonable positions.




Retarded follower of said "pragmatic" leftists wants everyone to know that the work hard mentality was created by a think tank in the 70s. That then opened door to EXTREME Christians. Whatever that means.



And of course, said "pragmatic" leftist has already been btfo'ed in the past.

 

[KiwiFarmerSimulator2021]

View attachment 2644175View attachment 2644176View attachment 2644177

Yes ok you have trauma but have you considered the real protagonist of the piece, your therapist.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

there's weird shit on twitter

 

[TerribleIdeas™]

Yes ok you have trauma but have you considered the real protagonist of the piece, your therapist.

How scary is it that you could get better counseling on KF? I mean, it would boil down to objectively valid life advice, like "don't be fat", "stop being a retard", or "lol, kill yourself, faggot", but it would be relevant, useful advice, and not some sob story about how the therapist is actually the one that needs to be given mental health assistance.

there's weird shit on twitter

View attachment 2645073

View attachment 2645089
View attachment 2645093
View attachment 2645095
View attachment 2645096
View attachment 2645097

1) Getting the gov't involved in anything is almost universally a bad idea, it's not "food apartheid", and yes, you're all fat and that's bad.
2-5) "Colorism" is a bullshit term made up to deflect from peoples' unwillingness to change themselves. "Light-skinned" has universally meant "didn't have to work outside and do risky shit", which is a sign of wealth, with the exception of outliers like "Victorian child that grew up frail", or whatever the fuck. Obama wasn't especially light-skinned, Larry Elder sure isn't, there's numerous other examples. Just admit you're lazy, ignorant, free-loading assholes, and I'll admit that I want nothing to do with people like that.

 

[Positron]

Phoebe Cohen: "rigor" has always been defined by a very thin slice of our society.

What's the problem with that. Academic worth is not popularity vote -- at least, it shouldn't be. And I can't see how quoting more pee o'seas and queers would help us better define "rigor".

there's weird shit on twitter
View attachment 2645073

"Orthorexic", literally "eating right". So they are pathologizing healthy eating, now that they have pathologized being male and being female.
And your "food apartheid" will end if you niggers stop robbing stores.

 

[Bad_Guys_are_Good4EVER]

Notice how no one in the SJW'S or LGBTQ+ community is talking about the highschool girl that got raped by a "trans" highschool boy wearing a skirt. Not one thing! These people claim to be for "women's rights." "Rights for everyone! Women's and gays alike" they said. "We gotta believe in women who have been sexually assaulted" they said.

But when the moment that their narrative comes crashing down, they hide. People were afraid of the consequences of having gender neutral bathrooms. Of allowing transgender men go into womens restrooms. What was the response? "There are no negative consequences for having transgender people inside the women's restroom. You are transphobic and a racist."

BOOM! Problem right there. The fact that these people refused to acknowledge that there COULD be consequences, we have consequences. These people are insane and they deserve to be fat shamed, and slut shamed and shunned from society. Maybe then we can have normal lives once again.

 

[Josterman]

Notice how no one in the SJW'S or LGBTQ+ community is talking about the highschool girl that got raped by a "trans" highschool boy wearing a skirt. Not one thing! These people claim to be for "women's rights." "Rights for everyone! Women's and gays alike" they said. "We gotta believe in women who have been sexually assaulted" they said.

But when the moment that their narrative comes crashing down, they hide. People were afraid of the consequences of having gender neutral bathrooms. Of allowing transgender men go into womens restrooms. What was the response? "There are no negative consequences for having transgender people inside the women's restroom. You are transphobic and a racist."

BOOM! Problem right there. The fact that these people refused to acknowledge that there COULD be consequences, we have consequences. These people are insane and they deserve to be fat shamed, and slut shamed and shunned from society. Maybe then we can have normal lives once again.

These people if you want to call them that are grifters and hypocrites

 

[fishercat]

View attachment 2644127

This is an obvious joke.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

"BIPOC academia" twitter is wild

 

[Bad_Guys_are_Good4EVER]

View attachment 2644127

Some believe that Brittany Spears built the Eiffel Tower i guess. Though it makes no difference to me as I hate anything french anyway, which includes the Eiffel Tower. Fun fact, the French government at one point wanted to tear down the Eiffel Tower but the people wanted it, so they kept it up. After all the Eiffel Tower was built for the world fair.

 

[Hog On Ice]

"BIPOC academia" twitter is wild

View attachment 2645514View attachment 2645515View attachment 2645516View attachment 2645517View attachment 2645518

View attachment 2645528

View attachment 2645534View attachment 2645535

View attachment 2645536View attachment 2645538View attachment 2645539View attachment 2645542

Does she not realize that putting that word salad in all caps makes her sound even more like a crazy nigger screaming on a street corner?

 

[AirdropShitposts]

Does she not realize that putting that word salad in all caps makes her sound even more like a crazy nigger screaming on a street corner?

She has probably thousands of tweets that are just her quoting some news story and posting "Spot The Pattern…always the hero/victim; never the villain"


And she's trying to push this whole Guiding Principles thing and trying to relate it to every news story happening:

And she mentions these "systems, institutions and policies" over and over:



I'm not exactly sure what it is she does

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

It's funny you mention the CSA because - just like the CSA - the CPC rose up against the legitimate government of their country. They were, in other words, insurrectionists and traitors.

 

[Dante Alighieri]

All these people are so fucking useless.

 

[Fetish Roulette]

View attachment 2644520

Given that Puerto Rico was a Spanish territory at the time, I'd say that the Confederates would have bigger problems than the United States.

 

[Unpaid Emotional Labourer]

there's weird shit on twitter

View attachment 2645073

View attachment 2645089
View attachment 2645093
View attachment 2645095
View attachment 2645096
View attachment 2645097

I think this is the first time one of them has straight out admitted what I have said OVER and OVER.

This is about groups - fat dark black women in this instance - being mad nobody wants them. That’s it. They’re so privileged and bored all they have to do is cry about how unfuckable they are, and attempt to pass legislation and create inescapable traps to force people to want them. But nobody will because you cannot force desire. Physical compliance yes. But they still won’t want you because you are fat, ugly, and undesirable.

No wonder they are willing to accept troons, who have the exact same perspective: rage at being undesirable, weird conviction that if they can just harass people long enough and shut down all escape routes, people will want them. But no. Compliance is not desire. You will never experience being desired because you are inherently undesirable. It‘s just real unfortunate that you’re not smart, or funny, or competent, or likeable, or charismatic, because what that means is that you have nothing to make up for being undesirable, so it’s no wonder you’re so mad about it. People with something else to offer can just make the best of things, but you have NOTHING, so all you can do is cry about being unwanted.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

I'm honestly kinda surprised that desirability politics hasn't been taken up by the troons and is still limited to mainly black spheres. Maybe they haven't found out about it yet.

Let me see if I can help: https://vocal.media/humans/desirability-politics

Because attraction and dating is political

''It's not my fault, if I'm only attracted to *blank*''.

''Attraction is personal and there is nothing I can do about it''.

These are opinions we hear often. Because sexuality is something most people see as private, they think it is individual but it is not quite true. The idea that being only attracted to one race of people or only people who are of a certain size is something that most people don't even want to debate anymore. Is there an objective and purely natral component to attraction and dating? Who you choose to be simply friends with, to have casual sex with or to date is political and it falls in the category of desirability politics. Being a Black physically disabled woman, this is something that takes a lot of space in my dating life and maybe some of you can relate to that too.

We talk about desirability politics when we look at the level to which someone is seen as desirable because of their social position. Your social position is constructed by your economic class, your social class, your sexual orientation, your race and ethnicity, whether you are cisgender or transgender and also whether or not you’re disabled. It takes into account the ways in which you are privileged and marginalized before having to consider the details of your physical appearance.

At first glance, I am a Black medium sized woman and that says something about my positionality. Being Black, I am marginalized because of my race, but I am privileged because I am not overweight and because I am cis. My disability is mostly invisible, meaning most people won’t first consider it. However, it is a crucial part of my positionality because in this ableist society, it affects my value as a human. According to systems of oppression, the most desirable partner is one that fits in every single box, meaning they are White, middle-class and upward, straight or straight passing (because this can also apply to LGB people), cisgender, thin and able-bodied. If you only find yourself to be attracted to people who fall in these categories, you should probably ask yourself a few questions. Furthermore, just because certain people experience attraction to people who are not at all in these categories, does not mean that your ''preferences'' are just as valid. Politically, they do not have the same weight and they are not the same. Does that mean you cannot be attracted to people who fit in those norms? Of course not, they are people just like everybody else. If your partner fits in these categories, does it mean you love them less? Obviously not, this is absolutely not the point I am trying to make. The issue comes if you chose your partner because you believe they are superior due to these categories, and if you believe these categories make them objectively more attractive. For example, if you have a White partner and you believe that them being White makes them more attractive because you think non-White people are unattractive. We all have a type, wether we acknoledge it or not. However, we need to deconstruct it and understand why we have one to begin with.

In a patriarchal society, the capital for women is beauty, and the capital for men is women. In a heteronormative world, women show their worth through their ability to get one man but men show their worth through their ability to get many women who are seen as desirable. Maybe this is a controversial view but I definitely think that men date primarly according to desirability politics. I mean, we all do to a certain extent but men more than women and it is because of the capital that comes with it. Sure, men will have casual relationships with many women but a lot of them they would never date because they recognize that in the eyes of other men, these women are not desirable. ''Yeah, I had sex with her but I wouldn't want anybody to know'', is something pretty common for a guy to say. The reason for that is the value this woman has according to him. He knows that disclosing the sexual relationship he had with her won't be beneficial to him, if anything, he could be seen as desperate and have his reputation be affected. Dating is even more political because it is obviously more public. The person you walk hand-in-hand with in the streets says something about you. A woman's level of desirability affects the way her male partner is perceived, because, as I said earlier, the capital for men is women. For women and girls, it doesn't really matter who you sleep with or date, the number simply has to be low.

Men have more to gain than women in this situation but they also have more to lose. In a society where it is believed that all a woman can bring to the table is her body, if it is not considered to be desirable, then you are seen as useless.

As a woman attracted to men, it is impossible not to fall into the trap of linking my value as a human to the attention I get from men. It is something I must battle because we are socialized that way. Being Black and therefore being racially marginalized is already a struggle of its own because the expectations for Black women are so high, the bar for us is so high. We must have a certain body type that is hard or simply impossible to obtain without plastic surgery, we must have light skin and have hair that is not too curly otherwise we are not seen as desirable. The fetishization of Black female sexuality exists through our body and what we are expected to do with our body. We must know how to dance, twerk and be sexually dominant because that is the fetish attached to us. Physically, there are things I cannot do because of my disability and so in the eyes of certain men, I become sexually incompetent; as a human I am now useless. Knowing that you are not at the top of the hierarchy when it comes to attractiveness and desirability makes you vulnerable to abuse because it often makes you insecure. ‘‘They could do so much better than me’’, is something I’ve told myself. I had people try to pursue me that I didn’t want to entertain because in my mind, once they would learn that I am disabled, they wouldn’t want me anymore. On the contrary, I have entertained people that I did not want and who didn’t treat me right because I felt like nobody else would want me and I was scared that I would die a virgin and alone. This time is over, and if you are there now, cut it out. Marginalized folks are vulnerable enough on a systemic level, you cannot let it enter your personal relationships.

If you are someone who has more social capital because you are White, cisgender and/or able-bodied and you are dating or casually seeing someone who doesn't have these privileges, do not prey on their vulnerability because that can destroy someone’s sense of self worth for years. If you are seeing someone and truly think to yourself that you are better than them because of something they cannot change about themselves, please leave them. Even if you don't think the other person knows how you feel about them or if you don't think it is a big deal because it is just a casual relationship, they probably do know and they probably do care, yet they are staying because they are insecure. This person is great but your biases and prejudices are clearly clouding your judgement. But to be very honest, in a better world, they leave you. This person, whoever they are, realizes how judgemental you are and understands that they deserve someone who sees them as the beautiful being they are, despite society's opinion. In a better world, they realize that they deserve better than you.

But how can you challenge these ideas? Ask yourself why you think you deserve ''better''. Why are you so insecure in your own value that you need to use others to your advantage? Why is it that your vision of beauty is so narrow? Why do you believe that someone's race, size, abilities or gender identity affects their worth as a tool for you? This may sound harsh but this is the base of it all.

I know I am a great person; I don’t need anyone to tell me. I have control over who I accept in my life and that is a right that I must apply, for my own good. I have standards and I have the right to apply them, and if you are in a similar situation, so do you. You are more than your social location and the people who disagree do not deserve to see all the small and beautiful details that make you, you.

Allie.

PS: Here is a podcast I participated to on the topic!

DATING


Lonely Allie .
23 year-old disabled sociology and sexuality student trying to change the world. Nothing more, Nothing less.

Montreal based, LGTQ+, Pro-Black Feminist.

 

[Fish Fudge]

So basically just incels, but using the language of the SJW. Got it.