Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Cosmos said:
View attachment 531302

:story:
Click to expand...
Fucking white people
3-Tlahuicol.jpg
 
White people pioneered torture? What?

Fucking humans didn't even pioneer torture. But I have to assume the first human torturer and torturee were black, since I believe the first humans were black. And I'm sure they got up to that shit all the time.
 
SJWs: wypipo don't have culture, they never invented anything

also SJWs: OMG I LUV COMMUNISM *puts sickle and hammer in twitter username* *blasts the soviet russian anthem* *makes "memes" with soviet russian leaders in them*

SJWs: THE UGANDAN KNUCKLES MEME IS BAD YOU CANT TALK LIKE THAT

also SJWs: COMRADE VODKA COMMUNISM COMRADE COMRADE [/bad russian accent]

also also SJWs: REEEEE RUSSIAN BOTS EVERYWHERE AND DRUMPF!!!
 
Mrs Paul said:
The Afiya Center is a reproduction clinic, like Planned Parenthood, only it's dedicated to helping women in the black community. THIS, however, was probably a bad idea, to put it mildly. It almost comes off as supporting eugenics.
Click to expand...
It's been my experience that the far left might object to the word "eugenics", but seem to embrace the basic tenets as long as you don't try to put a label on them.
 
ChurchOfGodBear said:
It's been my experience that the far left might object to the word "eugenics", but seem to embrace the basic tenets as long as you don't try to put a label on them.
Click to expand...
tbh, the far left is fine with a lot of bad things as long as you don't call it by what it is
 
fsds.png
sdkldksld.png
as a response to
wekpekw.png
Why do SJWs think that saying that sex is a spectrum (which is a flawed idea anyway, as explained by this Twitter thread https://twitter.com/TriciaFrasman/status/1006161802823159809) legitimizes the existence of 4682 quadrillion gender identities? They don't even know what the viewpoints of their ideological enemies are. So-called "TERFs" are very aware of the existence of intersex people.

Even the guy they're hailing as their new anti-TERF hero (and who appears to be pro-trans activism to an extent) says that trans ≠ intersex:
https://twitter.com/ScienceVet2/status/1035282947962810369
sddsds.png

Edit: added new link
 
Last edited:
ATaxingWoman said:
View attachment 531642 View attachment 531643as a response to
View attachment 531640
Why do SJWs think that saying that sex is a spectrum legitimizes the existence of 4682 quadrillion gender identities? They don't even know what the viewpoints of their ideological enemies are. So-called "TERFs" are very aware of the existence of intersex people.

Even the guy they're hailing as their new anti-TERF hero (and who appears to be pro-trans activism to an extent) says that trans ≠ intersex:
https://twitter.com/ScienceVet2/status/1035282947962810369
View attachment 531651
Click to expand...

Because everyone knows real scientists have slap fights on Twitter for those sweet affirmation reblogs.

If you keep manipulating language and changing words, then sure there's a sex spectrum. Yes, intersex people do exist and the research on Intersex disorders is fascinating. But, the definition of biological sex means the sex needs to be readily occuring in the species and also be able to sexually reproduce. Considering Intersex disorders are incredibly rare and nearly always results in sterility...

And pretty much any "actual scientist" will say that gender is made up human bullshit. You can't do tangible, observable science on how someone feels about their gender.

And using the argument as a justification for trans or gender identities is nonsense. But it happens all the time anyway.
 
northstar747 said:
Eh arguing that the poor shouldn't have children has been progrssive view forever he'l they even applied it to white trash and the irish.
Click to expand...

Until Lyndon Johnson gave poor people extra welfare if they had more babies, producing the crime wave of the 80s, which then ended because 15-20 years after Roe v. Wade many of the new potential criminals never existed since they had been aborted.

Wallace said:
Twenty bucks says every single one of them is white.
Click to expand...

Well duh, because any black witch would be into shit like voodoo, candomblé, obeah, etc, which is a hell of lot less retarded than the ramblings of some 20th century British guy filtered through 3rd wave feminism.
 
Corbin Dallas Multipass said:
White people pioneered torture? What?

Fucking humans didn't even pioneer torture. But I have to assume the first human torturer and torturee were black, since I believe the first humans were black. And I'm sure they got up to that shit all the time.
Click to expand...

I know this sounds like parody, but...

In the anthropology discipline, people have lost their careers for reporting that indigenous people with no white or European contact were extremely violent, that America under the Indians wasn't a peaceful, spiritual paradise, and Indians themselves practiced tribal warfare, were extremely violent and gleefully participated in tribal genocide.

I'm deadly serious that modern anthropology believes that all violent culture stems from whites, and if you stray from this message you will lose your job, your publications and your career. The 'Noble Savage' is a pinnacle of modern anthropological study.
 
Secret Asshole said:
I know this sounds like parody, but...

In the anthropology discipline, people have lost their careers for reporting that indigenous people with no white or European contact were extremely violent, that America under the Indians wasn't a peaceful, spiritual paradise, and Indians themselves practiced tribal warfare, were extremely violent and gleefully participated in tribal genocide.

I'm deadly serious that modern anthropology believes that all violent culture stems from whites, and if you stray from this message you will lose your job, your publications and your career. The 'Noble Savage' is a pinnacle of modern anthropological study.
Click to expand...

Modern anthropology is more into shit like "auto-ethnography" than actually conducting serious ethnographies. And it makes sense, since it's expensive to fly out to the middle of the Brazilian jungle, learn some arcane Indian language, and speak to some obscure tribe. Besides, said tribe probably was studied 50-60 years ago or more who was probably the only non-indigenous person they ever saw in their life.

But how true is this nowadays? I took an anthropology class in college, and when we discussed cultural universals, weapons, violence, and some level of inequality were among them. Although there was once an epic argument between the professor and like 3 or 4 students about the morality of that one tribe in New Guinea where young boys ritually perform oral sex on the elders of the tribe.

Seems very different from modern historians, where professors who have been involved in activism for Indian tribes have also written books that go into graphic detail about the murder and ethnic cleansing the same tribe's ancestors committed. Although those Indians seem to be very proud of what their ancestors did, and I'm sure if the majority of modern Indian tribes weren't poor and small in number, there would be as many arguments between different tribes as there are arguments between Slav nations.
 
Save the Loli said:
Modern anthropology is more into shit like "auto-ethnography" than actually conducting serious ethnographies. And it makes sense, since it's expensive to fly out to the middle of the Brazilian jungle, learn some arcane Indian language, and speak to some obscure tribe. Besides, said tribe probably was studied 50-60 years ago or more who was probably the only non-indigenous person they ever saw in their life.

But how true is this nowadays? I took an anthropology class in college, and when we discussed cultural universals, weapons, violence, and some level of inequality were among them. Although there was once an epic argument between the professor and like 3 or 4 students about the morality of that one tribe in New Guinea where young boys ritually perform oral sex on the elders of the tribe.

Seems very different from modern historians, where professors who have been involved in activism for Indian tribes have also written books that go into graphic detail about the murder and ethnic cleansing the same tribe's ancestors committed. Although those Indians seem to be very proud of what their ancestors did, and I'm sure if the majority of modern Indian tribes weren't poor and small in number, there would be as many arguments between different tribes as there are arguments between Slav nations.
Click to expand...

Modern anthropology has removed 'science' from its mission statement: "Interestingly, it isn't just that the AAA leadership is ditching science. They're also trying to position the AAA as being primarily about "public understanding" of humankind". Its the foremost professional organization and represents the way the field goes. That's not to say there aren't anthropologists who went 'fuck you cunts' and left. Not to mention anthropologists who have tenure and are well established can go against the grain. Some choice insights:

In the messages flying back and forth, I was reminded why anthropologists refer to the annual conference as "the meetings," plural: it's because they go and meet with their own actual disciplinary types, in separate groups, so that the real scientists don't have to deal too much with the fluff-head cultural anthropological types who think science is just another way of knowing.

Raymond Hames, Chair of the Anthropology Department at the University of Nebraska Lincoln, a scientific cultural anthropologist, said this to me when we talked about all this: "Advocacy is what we do as citizens in a democratic society. Even as anthropologists we must advocate on the basis of fundamental science. Science has a special currency in courts, public opinion, and in the legislative process. If we purge science from our mission statement we lose our credibility, the ability to advocate for effective change, and hence our power to do good. We become just another special interest group."
Click to expand...

There's also the summation of why they did it:
When all is said and done, science actually takes hard work, and a willingness to sometimes find out that your most cherished hypothesis is wrong. Ya gotta wonder, are those the real problems the AAA leadership has with science?
Click to expand...

Note: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...201011/no-science-please-were-anthropologists

This is from 7 years ago. While there are still scientific anthropologists, they've been cycled out like most of the social sciences. But there are some still around. There's also the fact that history is completely and laughably fucked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom