Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging

ChurchOfGodBear said:
This addresses a lot of the points I would have said in reply to your earlier post, but I'll try to clarify. History goes way back. Way, way back, and it encompasses thousands of peoples and cultures, some of which would be more alien to us than... well, actual aliens. If you're going to use a phrase like "The wrong side of history" then you're putting yourself in the position of making a judgement based on all of history, not just whatever facts you find most convenient.

We could talk about the confederacy, for example. Slavery is a ridiculously common practice that has been practiced by every race at some point. In the last 500 years, it has been less common, particulalry in the "developed world", but the overwhealming majority of humans ever born knew of the practice and lived with it in some capacity. To say that the Confederacy was on the "losing side of history" requires us to only look at the last ~300 years, and if you're going to do that, you need a very compelling argument as to why the most recent slice of time is so significant.
Click to expand...

I'd like to start by saying I have been saying "The losing side of history." I have never used the phrase "the wrong side of history." That brings morality into the affair, and as a history buff, I'm not fond of imposing morality upon history. Amoral and impersonal, that's how I'm viewing this issue.

To say that the Confederacy was on the "losing side of history" requires us to only look at the last ~300 years, and if you're going to do that, you need a very compelling argument as to why the most recent slice of time is so significant.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. The thing is, I'm not saying they were on the losing side (I cannot stress that wording enough. Losing. Not right or wrong.) because they were so wicked and evil that they practiced slavery. It was, as you say, a common historic practice. I do find it detestable, mind you, but that's a matter of ethics, not history.

I'm saying they are on the losing side of history because they lost.

Of course you then have to consider the future. The South will rise again and all that. It's true this is possible, it's also possible that England could rise again, reclaim the colonies, and put the United Empire Loyalists on the winning side of history. But if we really want to look at that, we would need to delve into probabilities and speculation and all that, which would be going a bit off topic, no?

As it stands, I feel quite confident saying they were on the losing side of history.

As were opponents of Interracial Mixing in the Anglo-American context.

As I feel women like the ones in that link are.

EDIT - As an aside - Is this taking things too far off topic? I am under the impression that the mods don't like that. Would people prefer to take this debate to messages or something?
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: BestUserName, ChurchOfGodBear, Coldgrip and 1 other person
Daario Naharis said:
I'd like to start by saying I have been saying "The losing side of history." I have never used the phrase "the wrong side of history." That brings morality into the affair, and as a history buff, I'm not fond of imposing morality upon history. Amoral and impersonal, that's how I'm viewing this issue.



I have to disagree. The thing is, I'm not saying they were on the losing side (I cannot stress that wording enough. Losing. Not right or wrong.) because they were so wicked and evil that they practiced slavery. It was, as you say, a common historic practice. I do find it detestable, mind you, but that's a matter of ethics, not history.

I'm saying they are on the losing side of history because they lost.

Of course you then have to consider the future. The South will rise again and all that. It's true this is possible, it's also possible that England could rise again, reclaim the colonies, and put the United Empire Loyalists on the winning side of history. But if we really want to look at that, we would need to delve into probabilities and speculation and all that, which would be going a bit off topic, no?

As it stands, I feel quite confident saying they were on the losing side of history.

As were opponents of Interracial Mixing in the Anglo-American context.

As I feel women like the ones in that link are.

EDIT - As an aside - Is this taking things too far off topic? I am under the impression that the mods don't like that. Would people prefer to take this debate to messages or something?
Click to expand...
Going too far OT is very frowned upon. I'd be happy to discuss this in messages, I'm just not sure what else i can say. I get the impression both you and I are giving this far more consideration than the average person who uses the phrase.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: BestUserName and Daario Naharis
I still want to see more of these "female only" utopias and trying to see how these radfems justify them.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Randall Fragg
MayMay said:
Well if they make another Bioshock game, that could be the next "Utopia" to trash.:P
Click to expand...
So The Wicker Man with guns?
I can imagine the protagonist who is an SJW who tries to sympathise with the utopia but ends up rebelling against it after discovering how it's slowley collapsing or something.
But of course, Devs would be too scared to tackles SJWs and the SJWs themselves would try their hardest to suppress this game from being made.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: BestUserName, Coral Apples and Randall Fragg
MayMay said:
Well if they make another Bioshock game, that could be the next "Utopia" to trash.:P
Click to expand...
You'd have to fight the big strong independent mommies, who herd around their little brothers, who collect Eve douches from the Fat activists who died of any number of natural causes by age 50. Plasmids would include: change gender, fire insensitive comment, dye hair, and self-diagnose.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: BestUserName, UnsufficentBoobage, GREEDY FIREMAN and 9 others
ChurchOfGodBear said:
I just realized.... Rusty Blackleford was some wierd fusion of a SJW and a loveshy. :'(
Click to expand...
They're not really all that different in the first place, just search "thin privilege" and you'll probably see loads of women whining that big, muscular men didn't want to date their "deathfat" (read: morbidly obese) selves. Same with the average tumblr feminist towards gay men and especially straight women.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Ohoolihan, Red_Rager and ChurchOfGodBear
Slowboat to China said:
It's funny how their idea of utopia is my idea of hell. Surrounded by other women ... constantly. No men, ever. Do they really think that there won't be any conflicts without men? Did none of them ever spend any time in the girls' locker room at school?
Click to expand...
Or have a sister?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage, Coral Apples, Burned Man and 1 other person
  1. https://static.kiwifarms.net/data/avatars/s/4/4733.jpg?1425090693 A moment agowagglyplacebo:
    tumblr_mgait124uk1ryeto5o1_1280.png
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage, GREEDY FIREMAN, chocolategingerale and 4 others
I've been thinking about this for awhile and I think I'm on to something here. Gonna history sperg a bit.
I think the current SJW movement and other garabage is just another case of American society shifting "left" after a period of general conservatism. Most the people who are SJWs now grew up during the Bush era. Too young to remember the Clinton era, they started forming political ideals at the height of Republican power in government. They where basically the kid who'd come in to high school wearing the Che shirt and said Bush sucked but couldnt tell you why when pressed for an answer.

It really started to come into full force when echo chambers like Tumblr appeared and they suddenly had a place to spew all this bullshit thus here we are today. The thing is this has happened before. I mean look at the hippy movement and then a few years later down the line during the Regan era with a resurgence of right-wing ideals.

I really dont doubt in a few years we'll see the same thing and be making fun of whatever hardcore right wing comes as the result of the next shift.
 
  • Agree
  • Optimistic
  • Autistic
Reactions: BestUserName, GREEDY FIREMAN, Ification and 4 others
Slowboat to China said:
It's funny how their idea of utopia is my idea of hell. Surrounded by other women ... constantly. No men, ever. Do they really think that there won't be any conflicts without men? Did none of them ever spend any time in the girls' locker room at school?
Click to expand...
That's just TOXIC MASCULINITY infecting our angelic womenfolk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back