Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Irony of the Women's Rights March

missbailey8
Posts: 3,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 4:51:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:

I think it's highly unfortunate that so many are caught up in "women's rights" and these marches. It's ludicrous, especially given the irony you pointed out. But, I also question how much validity they have to criticize Trump for being "sexist" when many of the agendas these women also push are to delegitimize men. It's a two way street with traffic on both sides. I also think it's ironic that so many of these women supported Clinton for the sole basis of her being a woman -- while not stopping for a moment to consider her husband undoubtedly cheated on her as well... yet she stayed with him.

It also discourages me to think we as Americans have become so comfortable with playing the victim card and protesting so adamantly when something doesn't go our way. I don't think it's a productive way to combat legitimate injustices by incessantly complaining. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not asserting that Trump ISN'T sexist (he very well may be), but the idea that a march targeted specifically at him BECAUSE he's a man and BECAUSE he won the election aren't necessarily helpful. It only exacerbates the problem of people complaining because they don't get their way and not accepting or tolerating (a word they like to use a lot) alternative viewpoints.

Sure, I think men should be respectful towards women, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think women deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. I think women should respect men, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think men deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. There needs to exist a mutual respect between the sexes... but demonizing another because they supposedly demonize you? That's counterproductive. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 4:53:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?

1. No
2. No
3. It aims to achieve a standard it does not uphold itself. They slash their own tires.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Skepsikyma
Posts: 9,514
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 5:11:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?

It wasn't a Women's Rights March, it was an anti-Trump march with a pink theme.
"Partout ou vous verrez un autel, la se trouve la civilisation."
- Joseph de Maistre -

"Woe that I live in bitter days,
As God is setting like a sun
And in his place, as lord and slave,
Man raises forth his heinous throne."
- Translation of 'Rhyfel', by Hedd Wyn -

Virtutem videant intabescantque relicta
Ragnar
Posts: 1,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 7:14:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Reading about her crimes, I literally threw up in my mouth.
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
illegalcombat
Posts: 1,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 8:02:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?

The problem here I wonder, is the "masses" don't know all the details of various leaders and or speakers for any given event, more so the bigger and more people you have at the event.

I doubt a person who has serious concerns say over sexism of women, reproductive rights, etc would be ok with sharia law or a person who in their past kidnapped and tortured.
Philocat
Posts: 779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 9:17:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
It was a pro-abortion march disguised as a 'womens march'. Because in these peoples' minds women can only be equal if they are allowed to kill their unborn babies for personal convenience.
illegalcombat
Posts: 1,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 10:38:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 9:17:28 AM, Philocat wrote:
It was a pro-abortion march disguised as a 'womens march'. Because in these peoples' minds women can only be equal if they are allowed to kill their unborn babies for personal convenience.

Hey Philo, I heard a rumor, a nasty rumor.................a woman, even a pregnant one does not lose her bodily rights, you know, body rights, rights to grant or deny others the use of your own body just because she is pregnant.

Don't worry too much, after hearing such a rumor, I shrugged it off, read my bible, praised the Lord, then screamed......................ABORTION IS MURDER !!!
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 12:00:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?

Agreed. Not only does the post make sense but it'll also be more likely for me to get to know woman on the site while doing so. I'm just being honest and human; it's a new revolutionary meme I'm spreading.
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 12:27:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:51:45 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:

I think it's highly unfortunate that so many are caught up in "women's rights" and these marches. It's ludicrous, especially given the irony you pointed out. But, I also question how much validity they have to criticize Trump for being "sexist" when many of the agendas these women also push are to delegitimize men. It's a two way street with traffic on both sides. I also think it's ironic that so many of these women supported Clinton for the sole basis of her being a woman -- while not stopping for a moment to consider her husband undoubtedly cheated on her as well... yet she stayed with him.

It also discourages me to think we as Americans have become so comfortable with playing the victim card and protesting so adamantly when something doesn't go our way. I don't think it's a productive way to combat legitimate injustices by incessantly complaining. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not asserting that Trump ISN'T sexist (he very well may be), but the idea that a march targeted specifically at him BECAUSE he's a man and BECAUSE he won the election aren't necessarily helpful. It only exacerbates the problem of people complaining because they don't get their way and not accepting or tolerating (a word they like to use a lot) alternative viewpoints.

Sure, I think men should be respectful towards women, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think women deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. I think women should respect men, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think men deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. There needs to exist a mutual respect between the sexes... but demonizing another because they supposedly demonize you? That's counterproductive. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

I would personally like to caution all movements to be balanced and avoid an appearance of bias. Groups like this have the clear goal of basically vote bombing to correct another bias so it is in fact very important imo for them to have very rational reasons for their actions.

That said, this is the absolute worst possible time to share this advice with woman's rights groups. We have a president that brags about grabbing pusssy, intentionally walks into Miss USA locker rooms while probably, ironically, spouting offensive 'locker room talk, has made numerous forceful, physical and unwanted advances and is likely under the manipulative control of his 'wife' since he appears to think he bought her and underestimates woman who can in fact be incredibly manipulative with men they have every reason not to respect.

How is electing this guy not a slap in the face (not the 'good kind' that inspires me to drop multiple hints about how helpful therapy is) to woman everywhere?
SeventhProfessor
Posts: 6,576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 12:44:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:51:45 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
I think it's highly unfortunate that so many are caught up in "women's rights"

Interesting
Stooge the Worst

#StandWithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

"bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind"
~mysteriouscrystals

"I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way."
~F-16

"SeventhProfessor is actually a surprisingly good poster."
~Devilry

https://docs.google.com...
Philocat
Posts: 779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 1:19:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 10:38:12 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 1/30/2017 9:17:28 AM, Philocat wrote:
It was a pro-abortion march disguised as a 'womens march'. Because in these peoples' minds women can only be equal if they are allowed to kill their unborn babies for personal convenience.

Hey Philo, I heard a rumor, a nasty rumor.................a woman, even a pregnant one does not lose her bodily rights, you know, body rights, rights to grant or deny others the use of your own body just because she is pregnant.

Bodily rights do not extend to killing someone inside it, just as property rights don't permit me to throw someone overboard to drown if I don't want them on my boat.


Don't worry too much, after hearing such a rumor, I shrugged it off, read my bible, praised the Lord, then screamed......................ABORTION IS MURDER !!!

Why bring religion into this?
illegalcombat
Posts: 1,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 1:38:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 1:19:01 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 1/30/2017 10:38:12 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 1/30/2017 9:17:28 AM, Philocat wrote:
It was a pro-abortion march disguised as a 'womens march'. Because in these peoples' minds women can only be equal if they are allowed to kill their unborn babies for personal convenience.

Hey Philo, I heard a rumor, a nasty rumor.................a woman, even a pregnant one does not lose her bodily rights, you know, body rights, rights to grant or deny others the use of your own body just because she is pregnant.

Bodily rights do not extend to killing someone inside it, just as property rights don't permit me to throw someone overboard to drown if I don't want them on my boat.

Even granting the boat claim, this does nothing, since there is a morally relevant difference between a ownership of a boat vs ones own body.

Now that you have made such a bodily assertion, I can do the same.......

No person has the right to another persons body against their will, even if such a thing denied will result in their death.

A person can use their own body to keep some one else alive, this is a privileged for the person being kept alive, not a right.

A person using their own body to keep some one else alive is under no obligation to maintain such a state, as such can take action to remove the dependence of the other on their own body of their own choosing.

A person has not being established to exist in the early pregnancy stages, ego the human organism has no right to life how ever envisioned in the first place.



Don't worry too much, after hearing such a rumor, I shrugged it off, read my bible, praised the Lord, then screamed......................ABORTION IS MURDER !!!

Why bring religion into this?

You do realize the irony of that statement in the broader abortion debate especially for the pro-life/anti choice side ?
slo1
Posts: 5,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 2:13:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

The March definitely states non violence is key. So let me ask you this. If a person has a violent past, serves her time in jail, and rehabilitation to point where is willing to commit to non-violence can they never be forgiven for their past.

As I understand her cause is to raise awareness to violent abuse of children and to those who commit abuse that they can change. I don't know what is in her heart, but if it is pure than there is nothing more Christian and womanly than forgiveness and redemption then going on to help others.

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

That is alarming, although one has to really understand what she actually believes. Even Sharia law can be interpreted via a greater context and reformed. There are reform movements that bring equity to Sharia as things such as requiring 4 male witnesses to convict a rapist are abandoned.

I think one really needs to understand her interpretation of Sharia before passing judgement.

On an extra note even if there certain aspects we don't like we need to embrace Islamic reformists rather than hate. These are the people who can change the religion and grab more believers from those who promote a literal interpretation.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 2:52:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 12:44:14 PM, SeventhProfessor wrote:
At 1/30/2017 4:51:45 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
I think it's highly unfortunate that so many are caught up in "women's rights"

Interesting

Notice the parentheses. Don't try to twist it.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 2:56:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 12:27:57 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 4:51:45 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:

I think it's highly unfortunate that so many are caught up in "women's rights" and these marches. It's ludicrous, especially given the irony you pointed out. But, I also question how much validity they have to criticize Trump for being "sexist" when many of the agendas these women also push are to delegitimize men. It's a two way street with traffic on both sides. I also think it's ironic that so many of these women supported Clinton for the sole basis of her being a woman -- while not stopping for a moment to consider her husband undoubtedly cheated on her as well... yet she stayed with him.

It also discourages me to think we as Americans have become so comfortable with playing the victim card and protesting so adamantly when something doesn't go our way. I don't think it's a productive way to combat legitimate injustices by incessantly complaining. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not asserting that Trump ISN'T sexist (he very well may be), but the idea that a march targeted specifically at him BECAUSE he's a man and BECAUSE he won the election aren't necessarily helpful. It only exacerbates the problem of people complaining because they don't get their way and not accepting or tolerating (a word they like to use a lot) alternative viewpoints.

Sure, I think men should be respectful towards women, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think women deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. I think women should respect men, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think men deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. There needs to exist a mutual respect between the sexes... but demonizing another because they supposedly demonize you? That's counterproductive. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

I would personally like to caution all movements to be balanced and avoid an appearance of bias. Groups like this have the clear goal of basically vote bombing to correct another bias so it is in fact very important imo for them to have very rational reasons for their actions.

I would agree.

That said, this is the absolute worst possible time to share this advice with woman's rights groups. We have a president that brags about grabbing pusssy, intentionally walks into Miss USA locker rooms while probably, ironically, spouting offensive 'locker room talk, has made numerous forceful, physical and unwanted advances and is likely under the manipulative control of his 'wife' since he appears to think he bought her and underestimates woman who can in fact be incredibly manipulative with men they have every reason not to respect.

I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

How is electing this guy not a slap in the face (not the 'good kind' that inspires me to drop multiple hints about how helpful therapy is) to woman everywhere?

It is, in some ways. But, my argument is that the march is less about promoting women's rights and more about complaining about something they didn't like -- and advancing a cause that is lost in their hypocrisy.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
PetersSmith
Posts: 6,898
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:17:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?

The women of this world have nothing left to lose but their chains.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 2:56:15 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 12:27:57 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 4:51:45 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:

I think it's highly unfortunate that so many are caught up in "women's rights" and these marches. It's ludicrous, especially given the irony you pointed out. But, I also question how much validity they have to criticize Trump for being "sexist" when many of the agendas these women also push are to delegitimize men. It's a two way street with traffic on both sides. I also think it's ironic that so many of these women supported Clinton for the sole basis of her being a woman -- while not stopping for a moment to consider her husband undoubtedly cheated on her as well... yet she stayed with him.

It also discourages me to think we as Americans have become so comfortable with playing the victim card and protesting so adamantly when something doesn't go our way. I don't think it's a productive way to combat legitimate injustices by incessantly complaining. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not asserting that Trump ISN'T sexist (he very well may be), but the idea that a march targeted specifically at him BECAUSE he's a man and BECAUSE he won the election aren't necessarily helpful. It only exacerbates the problem of people complaining because they don't get their way and not accepting or tolerating (a word they like to use a lot) alternative viewpoints.

Sure, I think men should be respectful towards women, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think women deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. I think women should respect men, but not favor them upon the sole basis of "equality." I think men deserve fair treatment, but not preferential. There needs to exist a mutual respect between the sexes... but demonizing another because they supposedly demonize you? That's counterproductive. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

I would personally like to caution all movements to be balanced and avoid an appearance of bias. Groups like this have the clear goal of basically vote bombing to correct another bias so it is in fact very important imo for them to have very rational reasons for their actions.

I would agree.

That said, this is the absolute worst possible time to share this advice with woman's rights groups. We have a president that brags about grabbing pusssy, intentionally walks into Miss USA locker rooms while probably, ironically, spouting offensive 'locker room talk, has made numerous forceful, physical and unwanted advances and is likely under the manipulative control of his 'wife' since he appears to think he bought her and underestimates woman who can in fact be incredibly manipulative with men they have every reason not to respect.

I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.


I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character. You really don't think this will effect his work relationships and cause problems? How many women has he alienated and made uncomfortable making them less effective workers even though I have read that he hires a high percentage woman (presumably so there is more pusssy to grab and nasty woman he can shame due to his own obvious disfunction with relationships with woman... BURN!).

This is a guy that called is something along the lines of disgusting when Hilary C presumably had to take a pee break and then proceeds to have pee pee parties in Russia so his lame as fk puppet master Putin has yet more influence over him if that were possible. The hypocrite condemned his behavior for being pathetic and elaborated that Russian prostitutes are the best in the world basically retracting his initial criticism.

The president should be an example of the best qualities North Americans should strive for for a good reason... immoral behavior is immoral because it's a shitty strategy in the long run.

I criticised Bill Clinton for immoral behavior before I realized their relationship is likely open and more politically motivated then anything else.

How is electing this guy not a slap in the face (not the 'good kind' that inspires me to drop multiple hints about how helpful therapy is) to woman everywhere?

It is, in some ways. But, my argument is that the march is less about promoting women's rights and more about complaining about something they didn't like -- and advancing a cause that is lost in their hypocrisy.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:37:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.

I'll take a look at it but again, I will say zero negative insults against any woman's rights groups irritated or anygry missteps over the next 4 years due to the scumbag we just put in office.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:43:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:37:20 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.

I'll take a look at it but again, I will say zero negative insults against any woman's rights groups irritated or anygry missteps over the next 4 years due to the scumbag we just put in office.

So their wrongs are justified by someone else's wrongs?
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:48:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:43:35 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:37:20 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.

I'll take a look at it but again, I will say zero negative insults against any woman's rights groups irritated or anygry missteps over the next 4 years due to the scumbag we just put in office.

So their wrongs are justified by someone else's wrongs?

No, I'm saying it's understandable that they are frustrated and prone to make angry mistakes right now.
Unstobbaple
Posts: 4,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 3:50:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:48:32 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:43:35 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:37:20 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.

I'll take a look at it but again, I will say zero negative insults against any woman's rights groups irritated or anygry missteps over the next 4 years due to the scumbag we just put in office.

So their wrongs are justified by someone else's wrongs?

No, I'm saying it's understandable that they are frustrated and prone to make angry mistakes right now.

Also pls read the words I am writing before your auto scripted replies... burn!
Ramshutu
Posts: 5,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 4:09:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 4:29:07 AM, missbailey8 wrote:
Many complained about the mission and lack of focus of the Women's Rights March, but I don't want this post to be about that. Instead, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the March that I haven't heard many discuss.

I am sure you have heard the definition of feminism promoted today: "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes." Now, keep in mind that they even promote on their website that the march's mission was to defend human rights. Here is an extension of that.

"The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear."


https://www.womensmarch.com...

That would be quite laudable if they actually showed that with the people chosen to represent the event. One speaker at the march named Donna Hylton kidnapped, tortured, sodomized, and eventually killed a man in 1985.

http://dailycaller.com...

That's not all. The National Co-Chairman of the march called Sharia Law "reasonable", despite the fact that women are clearly oppressed under its rule.

http://www.cnsnews.com...

So let me ask this: is this really promoting human rights? These are the people you want to represent women's and human rights? If so, what does that say about the Women's Rights March as a whole?

With the election of Donald Trump there has been, and continues to be, a very large fear about the winding back of human rights and equal treatment of individuals.

More specifically, in the case of the March itself, a big portion was about the dismissive and superficial attitude toward women that Trump has repeatedly espoused, and to a lesser degree, his general lack of decency towards many people.

Words matter, especially from a president; as words and nature of conversation help shape individual peoples attitudes subconsciously, and more importantly, many people feel that actions that will be taken by Trump and Republicans in general, including Planned Parenthood cuts, limiting access to abortion and reproductive equality; primarily by men.

Should a rapist have been included in this march? Probably not, and it should have been distanced from this individual.

Should someone in support of Sharia law have been included as a Co-whatsit? Probably not, or at least have been distanced from that individual too.

However, does this legitimize the march as a whole? Or make it hypocritical? Not so much.

If they were all marching for the aims of those individuals, it would be possible to make that argument; but in reality this is no different than accusing everyone who supported trump of being a racist, simply because some of his supporters are, and some of his staff are.

The really important part of this though, is that any which way you cut this, there is a significant number of people in this country who are terrified, and worried about the negative effects on a trump presidency, from the point of view of racism, inequality, injustice, and this incessant us-vs-them bunker mentality that the trump presidency seems to have taken on.

Trump is currently the president; and is currently doing more to bridge the gap between the U.S. and Vladimir Putin, in terms of what he is saying, the rhetoric he is using, and the overtones he is sending, than trying to bridge the gap between the people who did and didn't vote for him.

And we should really be talking about that, rather than trying to delegitimize the people who wanted to protest him.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 4:11:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:48:32 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:43:35 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:37:20 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.

I'll take a look at it but again, I will say zero negative insults against any woman's rights groups irritated or anygry missteps over the next 4 years due to the scumbag we just put in office.

So their wrongs are justified by someone else's wrongs?

No, I'm saying it's understandable that they are frustrated and prone to make angry mistakes right now.

I get you.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 4:15:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 3:50:02 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:48:32 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:43:35 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:37:20 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:34:36 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:28:55 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:26:18 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 1/30/2017 3:20:22 PM, Unstobbaple wrote:
I understand. I don't support Trump for his morality (or the lack thereof). It's not something worth celebrating.

I get what you're saying and I'm not gonna throw scum here. It honestly bugs me when people can just ignore a 'leader's' moral character.

I don't ignore it. It bothers me to see the US becoming a cesspool of immorality. But, my problem with the women's marches is because I don't see the wrongdoing being protested for what it is. I see hate for hate and an anti-Trump march rather than a women's rights march. There is a difference.

I also see your point, though. I don't really disagree with you.

Ok, cool. It just seems like a weird thing to complain about considering Trump's actions but I'll concerned that I basically know nothing about the march and didn't feel that that was necessary before making these points.

Well, go back to the OP. Look at the hypocrisy the march leaders' displayed. Do you think those people have any ground to stand on in protesting immorality or sexism? If voting for Trump counts as an endorsement for everything he does, so should marching in a march like this one.

I'll take a look at it but again, I will say zero negative insults against any woman's rights groups irritated or anygry missteps over the next 4 years due to the scumbag we just put in office.

So their wrongs are justified by someone else's wrongs?

No, I'm saying it's understandable that they are frustrated and prone to make angry mistakes right now.

Also pls read the words I am writing before your auto scripted replies... burn!

Lol, okay. Your wording is very hard to understand. And, my responses aren't auto scripted. Though I understand now what you were implying, it still doesn't seem valid to discount or legitimize any missteps by protesters on the basis of someone else doing something bad.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
missbailey8
Posts: 3,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2017 11:52:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/30/2017 2:13:23 PM, slo1 wrote:
The March definitely states non violence is key. So let me ask you this. If a person has a violent past, serves her time in jail, and rehabilitation to point where is willing to commit to non-violence can they never be forgiven for their past.

I suppose so, but she doesn't seem to have any remorse for her crime, as she blamed her sentencing on the fact that she's a black woman instead of the horrendous acts she committed.

"Because I was a woman that spent 27 years in prison and we are the most marginalized of this demographic, right? We continue to be silenced. We continue to be negated. We continue to be villified and dehumanized. It was my purpose today to stand up and to bring us into this moment and say, "We"re here, we"re relevant, and you must hear our stories. Our stories are equally important. "

"We have always been in this moment. We have always had this problem. It"s not about Trump. It"s not about any one male person. It has been a mindset, a mentality and a behavior that"s been perpetrated forever against women. " If you"re a black or brown woman, you know it"s been happening. The majority of prisons and jails are crowded with black and brown women, because of the dehumanization. We are criminalized for our color. We are criminalized and sexualized."


http://mobile.wnd.com...


As I understand her cause is to raise awareness to violent abuse of children and to those who commit abuse that they can change.
Actually, like the above states, she talked about the marginalization of black women.

I don't know what is in her heart, but if it is pure than there is nothing more Christian and womanly than forgiveness and redemption then going on to help others.
See the quoted statement.

That is alarming, although one has to really understand what she actually believes. Even Sharia law can be interpreted via a greater context and reformed. There are reform movements that bring equity to Sharia as things such as requiring 4 male witnesses to convict a rapist are abandoned.

Read this and you'll understand her position.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com...


I think one really needs to understand her interpretation of Sharia before passing judgement.

On an extra note even if there certain aspects we don't like we need to embrace Islamic reformists rather than hate. These are the people who can change the religion and grab more believers from those who promote a literal interpretation.

I never said that I hate Islamic reformists.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.