What is Ignored Here

[Athos_131]

#Resist

[Jed_]

When the Irish slut says Oppressor, she means me, and only me.

Okay, it's an inside joke.  I get that now, but as it was privately shared between you 2, I had no way of knowing that before.

The Irish slut wants men to be masculine, and she wants to be feminine despite the snowflakes that try and tell her that’s wrong.

I share those Rights.  Okay, however I would clarify that within those rights is the responsibility to define what Masculine means to the man, and Feminine means to the woman.  To a feminist, she may define protest against the Patriarchy as Feminine FOR HER.  For the woke gentleman, he may consider respecting the autonomy of women, and letting her suck him off, whenever she deMans it masculine.  (So long as the flesh is willing.)

The only issue I have is with anyone telling any Other woman how to be feminine, or any Other man how to be Masculine.  At that point, we cease to be people to them (The Oppressor) just sexual stereotypes.  If we can master those tricks, letting women be the woman they want to be, and men be the man they want to be, then sexual Oppression will end.

I’m of the mind people can be however and whoever they want, but you can’t redefine masculine and feminine in the way you describe.  There’s nothing wrong with a man being feminine and a woman being masculine in some aspects or all aspects, but trying to redefine that is like saying petite is huge and obesity is anorexic.

[Jed_]

When the Irish slut says Oppressor, she means me, and only me.

Okay, it's an inside joke.  I get that now, but as it was privately shared between you 2, I had no way of knowing that before.

Her quoting me in her response and not you wasn’t a clue?

[psiberzerker]

I’m of the mind people can be however and whoever they want, but you can’t redefine masculine and feminine in the way you describe.  There’s nothing wrong with a man being feminine and a woman being masculine in some aspects or all aspects, but trying to redefine that is like saying petite is huge and obesity is anorexic.

Globally/individually.  Usane Bolt can claim that being the fastest man alive is pretty fucking masculine, and I'm not going to argue with him.   Germaine de Randamie can claim the Featherweight UFC title as a triumph of Femininity, and I won't argue with her.

Andy Kafman got his ass kicked, in the ring, by women, to taunt Jerry Lawler, and that was wrong.  It was a joke, and intentionally wrong, but it didn't prove a damned thing about anyone else that wasn't involved.

I'm not defining, masculinity, nor femininity.  I'm just not arguing with anyone, man, nor woman, who's personal definitions don't agree with mine.  That's the distinction, telling anyone she's not feminine enough, or he's not masculine enough because of your personal sexual definitions makes you the oppressor.  What you do privately is none of my damned business.

Her quoting me in her response and not you wasn’t a clue?

That she was calling you an Oppressor?  Yes, that was explicit.  That there's some inside joke between you that that's a keyword for?  No, of course not.  This is a public forum.  

IDGAF who you call what, especially since she's taking up the crusade of making sure nobody ever calls anyone a Nazi ever again.  (Even when they're literally flying Nazi flags.)  Those articles she cited wheren't here on Kristen's Board, nor about her, personally.  And yet, here we are talking about it, as if we all have the right to talk about other people's conversations, on a public forum.  (As long as nobody's calling names.)  If she only wants to be spoken to when she speaks to me, then she should follow the same rule, and butt out of other people's conversations.  Otherwise, it's a double standard, and censorship.  She gets to decide who calls whom a Nazi, and she can call anyone she wants, anything she wants, because she's the de-facto victim.

[Athos_131]

#Resist

[Jed_]

I’m of the mind people can be however and whoever they want, but you can’t redefine masculine and feminine in the way you describe.  There’s nothing wrong with a man being feminine and a woman being masculine in some aspects or all aspects, but trying to redefine that is like saying petite is huge and obesity is anorexic.

Globally/individually.  Usane Bolt can claim that being the fastest man alive is pretty fucking masculine, and I'm not going to argue with him.   Germaine de Randamie can claim the Featherweight UFC title as a triumph of Femininity, and I won't argue with her.

Andy Kafman got his ass kicked, in the ring, by women, to taunt Jerry Lawler, and that was wrong.  It was a joke, and intentionally wrong, but it didn't prove a damned thing about anyone else that wasn't involved.

I'm not defining, masculinity, nor femininity.  I'm just not arguing with anyone, man, nor woman, who's personal definitions don't agree with mine.  That's the distinction, telling anyone she's not feminine enough, or he's not masculine enough because of your personal sexual definitions makes you the oppressor.  What you do privately is none of my damned business.

I would never agree with applying a label of ‘not masculine enough’ or ‘not feminine enough’, but just like big and small, most reasonable people would agree with the historical attributes applied to the terms.  To not do so is just fucking confusing.

[Jed_]

#Resist

#Resist

Are these your ways of saying you’re not getting enough attention?

Don’t worry, you can still give me a boo tomorrow snowflake.

[Athos_131]

#Resist

[psiberzerker]

just like big and small, most reasonable people would agree with the historical attributes applied to the terms.

The historical attributes for feminitity used to include Fainting.  In the same era, the Masculine attributes included Smoking, and Voting.  Those changed.

The definitions aren't set in stone, for all time.  Language changes, hell Republican doesn't mean what it used to mean, In Our Lifetimes.  That's called a False Dichotomy.  Man, Woman, those mean things we can measure, but you yourself just admitted that it's okay for a Man to be Feminine, and a Woman to be Masculine.

Both terms mean having the Attributes ASSOCIATED WITH being fe/male.  You see?  So, who's to say that wearing a skirt is intrinsically female.  No True Scotsman?  "It's a kilt!"  Balding is biologically masculine, so does that mean that a woman is more masculine when she starts losing her hair?  This is a trait (Male Pattern Baldness) Biologically associated with being Masculine.

A lot of these things are Associated with Masculinity, because they always were, Historically associated with Masculinity.  Like Ruling a Nation historically Was.  That does not mean it still is, nor shall it always be.

[Jed_]

Alright, alright, you got many valid points.

My mind as a freaking pervert is primarily focused on the sexual aspects of masculinity and femininity, not if a kilt is a fucking skirt.

[psiberzerker]

My mind as a freaking pervert is primarily focused on sexual aspects of masculinity and femininity, not if a kilt is a fucking skirt.

All right, then we'll stick to that.  You can find a girl who prides herself on her cock sucking skills, as a demonstration of her Femininity.  Or, you can make do with one who doesn't, and try to get her to accept that.

[Jed_]

My mind as a freaking pervert is primarily focused on sexual aspects of masculinity and femininity, not if a kilt is a fucking skirt.

All right, then we'll stick to that.  You can find a girl who prides herself on her cock sucking skills, as a demonstration of her Femininity.  Or, you can make do with one who doesn't, and try to get her to accept that.

Mine only does that the rare times I manage to get her drunk.  She’s not experienced and expresses both a lack of confidence in being any good (she’s not) and ‘me no like’.  Despite her occasional desire to ride me like she’s the lead jockey in the Kentucky Derby, she’s actually sexually submissive.  Her lack of experience is something I’m very slowly working on.  I got no complaints, she’s the most responsive girl I’ve ever been with, she feels like I’m fucking a teenager and is generally good to go any time I want.

[psiberzerker]

Despite her occasional desire to ride me like she’s the lead jockey in the Kentucky Derby, she’s actually sexually submissive.

Okay, here's where Toxic masculinity, and femininity start to rear their ugly little heads.  For more examples, we have the word "Cuck."  This tends to be used by virgins, who blame women for not fucking them, and then covet their neighbor's wives, because that would somehow Prove their masculinity.  

Contrast that with the Cuckhold Couple, in this case the man, who re-affirms his Masculinity whenever he has to, because he puts his marriage to the test.  What these handjobs who've never been in the same room with a couple like this never get past is watching his wife with another man.  (The point where they wouldn't know what to do with her.)  The part that reaffirms their marriage isn't when she cheats.

She comes back, to him.  She could fuck a football team, and still come back to him, because regardless of how young, strong, and hung they are, they don't have what she married.  They aren't Him.  That's fucking masculine.

The guys that fear their wife is cheating on him, because he doesn't "Take care of business?"  They're insecure.  That's not masculine, that's not even feminine (Plenty of women fear that too,) it's just pathetic.

Being dominant, or submissive in bed is just that.  Dominant, submissive and/or switch.  These are not intrinsically masculine, nor feminine, even though they have been historically associated with gender roles.

[psiberzerker]

On another axis, you have the male Masochist.  Generally that's considered Submissive, it isn't.  The same masochist could go get in the ring, laugh off all attempts for the other guy to beat the crap out of him, and still last through the fight.  If he gets off on it, it's not gay, even without another woman in the ring.

If he cuts himself?  Okay, now he gets home, and instead of beating himself up to relieve stress, he lets his wife scratch up his back, while he punches his glans into her cervix.  And she takes it, like a champ, and she gets off on it.

Is that masculine, or feminine?  A woman that can take a pounding, like a champ?

The answer is:  No, it isn't.

Toxic femininity is being so submissive that she lets her husband use her as a punching bag, and stays out of "Loyalty" to her man.  Ride, or Die, literally.

[Jed_]

Um, I’m too sleepy to acknowledge these last posts with anything other than, ‘nonsensical rants noted, don’t expect a reply.’

[psiberzerker]

Um, I’m too sleepy to acknowledge these last posts with anything other than, ‘nonsensical rants noted, don’t expect a reply.’

Goodnight, sweet prince, and may the angels speed you to your rest...

I'll be here in the mourning.

[MissBarbara]

There is a lot going on in the political thread, and it all tends to be one-sided.  And because of that, I think it is telling that the rhetoric so many people here support accumulated in a protest outside a journalist's house, Tucker Carlson's, with threats that he's not safe made not to him, but to his family.

I apologize in advance for trying to address the OP on point, and for utterly failing to resort to name-calling and ad hominem attacks, but are you actually saying that the protests outside Tucker Carlson's home are "our" fault, and that it was engendered by the content and tenor of "the political thread" on KB?

Irish slut, no one should have protestors outside their home or have their meal interrupted by people disagreeing with their politics.  In fact, that really annoys me because it plays into the right’s rhetoric that all the left are like that, dangerously uncivil.

The plain fact is that virtually no one on "The Left" supports the protests outside Carlson's home. The group that led the protests self-identifies as Antifa extremists, and they in no way represent the general view of those on "The Left." More to the point, a couple of opinion pieces by outlier bloggers neither represents the general sentiment on "The Left."

This is a non-controversial controversy...

[psiberzerker]

This is a non-controversial controversy.

"Mertyl, get th' hose.  Those dadblamed liberals is at it again..."

It's a pretty reliable sign, in modern (Let's say the last 25 years) political commentary, when certain nebulous terms are used, repeatedly, they have abous as much meaning as the accusation.  Like Rush Limbaugh revolutionized the media with such Rightist namecalling, as "Feminazi," and using "Liberal" as a curse word.

That's what "The Left' means in this context:  Nothing, no one, like the "Far left," and even worse, the "Alt left."  Because some extremely deluded bigots started calling themselves the "Alt-right" (Which is the darker edgier Alternative to the Right.  A niche traditionally held by Progressives) then logically, there must be an "Alt left," because that's how logic works, right?  What gets me after the whole Teabaggers is nobody started calling themselves the Coffee Filters, because, IDFK, that would be silly?  (Not much sillier than the phantom "Alt Left.")

So, that's where the signal to noise ratio is coming from here.  The magic words she has to say to stir up fear.  "The left," on the assumption that anyone with 2 neurons to rub together should be as terrified by "The left" as she is, instead of calling people "Cucks,' or "SJWs," or the perennial favorite, "Nazis."

But just in case, anyone is thinking about calling someone Nazis, here.  Now in the wrong board because we didn't give her enough attention in "Politics" where this discussion belongs.  (We don't have a sub-forum for Identity Politics, like "The Left")  She's just going to accuse us of calling her that preemptively, because apparently she pathologically incapable of articulating an argument, that doesn't include accusing someone (On "The Left") of calling her a Nazi.  

You know what?  AntiFa defines itself by it's opposition to Fascism.  So yeah, they see Fascists everywhere else.  You would think that someone who identifies as "Not a Nazi" would be able to understand that.  Nobody else has to prove that they're NOT a Nazi.  Pretty much ever.  It's not like the real Nazis go to any trouble to hide it.

Closet Nazis are about as much a myth as "The Left."

[psiberzerker]

The main problem I have with Antifa is that their tactics play into the enemy's hands.  They're Nazis, litarally flag waving Nazis.  They want a fight on the streets, and you can tell, because they adopted the symbols they associate with Nationalistic Power.  Destabilizing the government, burning down the capitol building, krystalnacht...  Instead of Terrorists, they're Angerist.  Madists, their emotional weapon of choice isn't fear, it's Rage.

So, they're going to use Outrage against fucking Fascists?  That's like fighting a house fire with Molotovs, and flame throwers.  In Charlottesville, they showed up with Riot Shields.  They wanted to cause a riot, and what did AntiFa give them?

Exactly what they came prepared for.  I don't mind fighting Nazis, in fact, I would even go so far to say that I Hate them, but I want to win.  I don't want to hand over the streets, because they're better organized, and better prepared.  (As evidenced by showing up with a Shield Wall, for Crowd Control.)

That's what's wrong with Antifa, they're better antagonists than even their own Allies.  They have done more, in 2 years, for the 4th Reich than the Ku Klux Klan just by marching against them.  The Nazis showed up for a fight, and those fucking idiots gave them one.

[Jed_]

There is a lot going on in the political thread, and it all tends to be one-sided.  And because of that, I think it is telling that the rhetoric so many people here support accumulated in a protest outside a journalist's house, Tucker Carlson's, with threats that he's not safe made not to him, but to his family.

I apologize in advance for trying to address the OP on point, and for utterly failing to resort to name-calling and ad hominem attacks, but are you actually saying that the protests outside Tucker Carlson's home are "our" fault, and that it was engendered by the content and tenor of "the political thread" on KB?

Irish slut, no one should have protestors outside their home or have their meal interrupted by people disagreeing with their politics.  In fact, that really annoys me because it plays into the right’s rhetoric that all the left are like that, dangerously uncivil.

The plain fact is that virtually no one on "The Left" supports the protests outside Carlson's home. The group that led the protests self-identifies as Antifa extremists, and they in no way represent the general view of those on "The Left." More to the point, a couple of opinion pieces by outlier bloggers neither represents the general sentiment on "The Left."

This is a non-controversial controversy...

I have seen both in the news and on this forum a little bit of excuse making for Antifa.  It’s been in the context of ‘At least they’re anti-Nazis.’  This was back during the Charlottesville rally and the protests.

I haven’t really noticed any continuing ‘support’ for Antifa since then, here or in the media  I think that’s because those of us that are more left politically have realized just how truely toxic they are.  That realization was not immediate, it grew over time, it did grow rapidly though.

Unfortunately, the right does what they always do and try to paint all on the left with that extremist brush.  Even more unfortunately, they’re damn good at it.