Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging

EmpGulcasa said:
The Yakuza game series is a really good example of this, and I remember at least one article bitching that there were no gays among the almost all male cast and claiming so many of the characters were "queer coded".
Click to expand...
And if said characters don't spend the whole game buttfucking each other, then the game devs were "queerbaiting" and that's literal violence.
 
  • Like
  • Lunacy
Reactions: Elim Garak, Doctor Hobo, atleast3letterslong and 9 others
AmazingEagle said:
Exactly, the same thing can be said if a guy has admiration for another guy who is beefy.
Click to expand...
>tfw no astropath gf said:
There's nothing gay about admiring another man's great physique.
Click to expand...
EARDb4LXUAEcZl2.jpg
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: AbyssGazer, Wych Elm, graywolf88 and 30 others
>tfw no astropath gf said:
There's nothing gay about admiring another man's great physique.
Click to expand...
I explained this to someone as being the same as a gay man perceiving a woman as attractive, but having no sexual interest.

Hell, I've seen guys that intellectually I can say 'Huh, he's not bad.' But it usually follows up with 'Bet the girls try to climb him like a tree.'

That sentiment has gotten people to mistake me for bisexual, which I find hilarious. I'm not even mad, it just makes me laugh.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Wych Elm, Elim Garak, Exterminatus and 16 others
Marshal Mannerheim said:
That was apparently the fault of unnamed ”conservatives in Congress”. These people genuinely think that FDR could do no wrong and could only be wronged.
Click to expand...
The far lefts fetishzation of FDR is really bizarre

FDR touted America first, put the Japanese in interment camps, and tried to pack the supreme court when they struck down his signature legislation.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Doctor Hobo, Oats12345 and 6 others
Eekum Bokum said:
What is the story behind the "parties flipped" shit i see so often? I swear i've seen someone explain it before but for the life of me i cannot rememeber.
Click to expand...
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html
The "switch" had far more to do with migration patterns and the economic growth of the South. People have a weird idea that the parties' voter demographics just made a 1-to-1 switch for no reason, or simply because the parties began "pursuing" them. A realignment is not a "switch." The idea that party politics will remain stable across demographics is just a farce; you just have to look at the conservative shift of Latinos to see that. People vote based on what the facts on the ground are, and both parties had trouble keeping up with the changing needs of voters. If you're black and move out of the South and find that urban Dems are more likely to help you get a job and unionize or whatever, then you may switch your vote even though you used to be a Republican, because the facts of your daily life have changed, and you don't have to worry about feeling bad for voting for "racist" Southern Democrats. The parties didn't "swap values," there were simply different problems facing the country that the parties had to adapt to.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak, Exterminatus, Baroque and 14 others
1625347709214.png


Capitalism is slavery.

Eekum Bokum said:
What is the story behind the "parties flipped" shit i see so often? I swear i've seen someone explain it before but for the life of me i cannot rememeber.
Click to expand...

Before the 1950s the Republican Party was a regional party largely focused on the north, while the Dems were a national party based in the south. New-Dealism and immigrant enclaves gave the Dems a firm foothold in the north, and the south was 100% theirs. Both parties had conservative and progressive factions, and most debate was over larger ideas of finance. The Republicans even split in half over the factionalism with Teddy Roosevelt (BM/R)

In in the 40s Truman (D) embraced civil rights. In the 50s and 60s Kennedy (D) and Johnson (D) also followed the same path. Civil rights and segregations were the hot issues, and the once solid south became a battleground. Republicans embraced racism to fight over the south. The myth is that people make the mistake of assuming that the Dems just instantly abandoned southern racism or that racism in American politics has ended. Both parties pander to racist attitudes even today, just the racist attitudes of different groups of people.


Here is an interesting speech from a southerner on the topic. It actually was part of a strategy to wrap prejudice in the American flag. Now, it goes without saying that "freeze peach = hate speech" or "markets = bigotry" is woke nonsense, but that was part of a plan.
 
  • Lunacy
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Baroque, Doctor Hobo and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back