U.S. Politics

[CaptainOblivious]

genuinely not following.

You said:

but the thing it tends to refer to is violence against women.

You make an accurate observation here, "gender based violence" is just a way of forefronting women's lib issues under the pretense of wanting equality. So they say they they are against violence in general, but in actuality they're just a special interest group.

But that kind of misleading labeling is giving rise to misleading labeling 2.0, namely that if you don't support the special interest group then you must be a prejudicial bigot.

Your post indicated you were confused as to the motivation behind the branding, I am explaining the motivation; that it will be misunderstood is the point.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

View attachment 1001710

Wait... you actually think I'm Christian?

 

[AfricanTech]

"China Virus" to me was a critic on China on it's poor food regulations/conditions. A reminder that China needs to be called out on this humanitarian problem they have. It's a reminder that corporations and governments are willing to turn a blind eye and not pressure China because China makes so much money for them.

ie. Calling China's Government out on their bullshit because no-one else has the balls to.

But apparently I got it wrong and it's meant to be a racist thing now.

Context über alles...

 

[AfricanTech]

You have to first interpret it as racism. If I say Zimbabwe is a piece of rubbish country do you think I'm saying Zimbabweans are pieces of rubbish people?

What's the context Moose?

Context is everything.

 

[greg0205]

Wait... you actually think I'm Christian?

Wait... you actually thought that was the point I was making?

 

[daelm]

Instead now if you say 'all lives matter' and not 'black lives matter', you're racist. I predict the shitty feminists will follow suite before the decade is out.

this thing is such a fvcking unnecessary flashpoint. when it started, it was purposeful. it was making the point in reaction to the perceived disdain about killing black people. so it was pertinent - "Black lives matter."

when i hear it or read it, i hear it that way - as it was intended by the people grieving and upset. basically, it doesn't cause me trauma and my white DNA rests easy.

the rest of the nonsensical back-and-forth arguments, i let go by, frankly, because if a person responding "all lives matter" (a) understood it the way I do, then they'd have to be deliberately denying the grief and i probably don't want to talk to them, or (b) they're misunderstanding the whole circumstance they find themselves in, and it won't help me to talk to them. whatever the case, i think that when the discussion became about the slogan, rather than the casual racism that leads to black people being more easily killed in the course of arrests and traffic stops, it's pretty much purposeless. it's like trolling, just on the level of a rolling national discourse. basically, if you're talking about the troll, the troll has won.

edit: maybe i'm too pragmatic or bad with abstraction or something, but i tend to always be aware that underneath the sloganeering and hyper-intellectualised line-in-the-sand-drawing that passes for public discourse, there's usually something crappy going on and someone is having a shitty time.

edit edit: this edit is just for you because i know the edits fvck with you

edit edit: (this one too.)

edit: (this one too)

edit: hiiiiiiiii

 

[rietrot]

Finally, TDS has been eliminated from humanity.

Anyone heard of this new syndrome? Something about being mad that Biden is going to wreck American and thus the world or something. Trying to think of it now, just... for some reason can't seem to come up with the abbreviation... it's at the tip of my tongue... anyone have any idea perhaps?

BIGTWAATTWOS.

Name needs some work. But it's true.

 

[AfricanTech]

I couldn't resist ...

I blame my TDS

 

[Moosedrool]

What's the context Moose?

Context is everything.

Economy up to shyte, hyper inflation, they had a dictator in power... etc..

It's only SJW creativity which assigns racism to these things. It's really not my fault you interpret things this way.

"China Virus" to me was a critic on China on it's poor food regulations/conditions. A reminder that China needs to be called out on this humanitarian problem they have. It's a reminder that corporations and governments are willing to turn a blind eye and not pressure China because China makes so much money for them.

ie. Calling China's Government out on their bullshit because no-one else has the balls to.

But apparently I got it wrong and it's meant to be a racist thing now.

This is spot on.

Anyone who saw this as apparent racism was either one of the xenophobes who started they're shyte before Trump even hammered on the term and neo "progressive" SJW types.

 

[daelm]

You said:


You make an accurate observation here, "gender based violence" is just a way of forefronting women's lib issues under the pretense of wanting equality. So they say they they are against violence in general, but in actuality they're just a special interest group.

possibly that's the intent at some policy level, or within some group, but in my experience broadly the programme of work that GBV ends up covering is much more prosaically about trying to either sweep up behind some brutal **** or figure out how to prevent it. (i don't know if you've been close to it, but some that stuff is fvcking horrendous.) maybe at some policy level it's used as a fig-leaf for equality, but where the rubber hits the road, it's mostly about trying to figure out how to protect women from being beaten to a pulp.

But that kind of misleading labeling is giving rise to misleading labeling 2.0, namely that if you don't support the special interest group then you must be a prejudicial bigot.

using labels to target people is pretty much all the rage across the spectrum. i mean, have you read this thread?

 

[CaptainOblivious]

Wait... you actually thought that was the point I was making?

I'm not clear on why the poor are blessed. Perhaps you'd like to clarify, and maybe take a vow of poverty?

 

[AfricanTech]

Economy up to shyte, hyper inflation, they had a dictator in power... etc..

It's only SJW creativity which assigns racism to these things. It's really not my fault you interpret things this way.



This is spot on.

Anyone who saw this as apparent racism was either one of the xenophobes who started they're shyte before Trump even hammered on the term and neo "progressive" SJW types.

China Virus as used by DT does not conform to your and 2021's interpretation.

Others have already explained why more eloquently than me.

If you don't see it, you don't.

It is what it is.

 

[STS]

I'm not clear on why the poor are blessed. Perhaps you'd like to clarify, and maybe take a vow of poverty?

I am going to help here because it appears to be a whoosh moment, but only because you may not be familiar with the story.

Jesus was trying to make a point about poor people, in the same way people are trying to make a point about being black in America. Somebody corrected him, missing and ruining the point he was trying to make, mich the same way the ALL lives matter movement is missing the main messages of the BLM movement

 

[daelm]

I'm not clear on why the poor are blessed. Perhaps you'd like to clarify, and maybe take a vow of poverty?

Jesus was a communist. easy.

(also, he very much thought that the world was coming to an end in his lifetime, and so he wasn't that big on making plans or collecting stuff.)

 

[CaptainOblivious]

possibly that's the intent at some policy level, or within some group, but in my experience broadly the programme of work that GBV ends up covering is much more prosaically about trying to either sweep up behind some brutal **** or figure out how to prevent it. (i don't know if you've been close to it, but some that stuff is fvcking horrendous.) maybe at some policy level it's used as a fig-leaf for equality, but where the rubber hits the road, it's mostly about trying to figure out how to protect women from being beaten to a pulp.

Right, and typically men are left to fend for themselves because nobody gives a rats arse about them and the female interest group has taken a name that implies general interest.

But as the stats show, their plight is actually significant.

using labels to target people is pretty much all the rage across the spectrum. i mean, have you read this thread?

Yes, but it takes a certain kind of peculiar logic to infer that "all lives matter" is really a statement that professes racism, and this logic does not manifest itself all across the spectrum.

 

[daelm]

Right, and typically men are left to fend for themselves because nobody gives a rats arse about them and the female interest group has taken a name that implies general interest.

But as the stats show, their plight is actually significant.

agreed 100%. as i said, i'd honestly like the things to be designated as they are, because the focus is important.

Yes, but it takes a certain kind of peculiar logic to infer that "all lives matter" is really a statement that professes racism, and this logic does not manifest itself all across the spectrum.

nothing manifests across the spectrum. you know that as well as I do. but we're not in the realm of genuine debate about this stuff most of the time, we're fvcking trapped in the insane, zero-sum finger-pointing and points-scoring that passes for discussion.

 

[AlmightyBender]

No it's not racist to talk about China's concentration camps. The Chinese government is a vile and oppressive regime who are exterminating an ethnic minority (amongst other vile activities).

That DOESN'T give anyone the right to be racist towards China as a country.

Edit: grammar, sp

Further to this the concern and harm is towards Asian-decent people in countries that are NOT China
i.e. American citizens in America are getting harassed. China can fend for themselves and their own citizens.

This harm and harassment can be minimized by not using this language.
The fact that they refuse to play ball at zero cost to themselves speaks volumes...

The only logical conclusion is that harm is the intended outcome. Which it obviously is.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

I am going to help here because it appears to be a whoosh moment, but only because you may not be familiar with the story.

Jesus was trying to make a point about poor people, in the same way people are trying to make a point about being black in America. Somebody corrected him, missing and ruining the point he was trying to make, mich the same way the ALL lives matter movement is missing the main messages of the BLM movement

Except Jesus was actually telling people how privileged the poor are.

So... ya...

Maybe you'd like to explain how ethnocentrism became an acceptable social platform for me?

 

[AlmightyBender]

genuinely not following.

He thinks this is the "Mommy Issues' thread instead of the US Politics thread. Simple forum navigation error, nothing to worry about.

 

[daelm]

Except Jesus was actually telling people how privileged the poor are.

this is interesting. what do you mean by it? genuine question.