Dumb Political Correctness

Sangre Naranjada said:
maxresdefault.jpg

I don't know any conservative man that would want to get with a liberal woman. If you're talking about banning sex with the likes of this, then I say "Thank you!"
Click to expand...

For me, it was about 18 years ago, when I was in my early 20s and didn't have good judgement when it came to dating. And the liberal women I dated weren't like the wingnuts we see now. They were basically nice girls - just a little granola and vegetarian, which tends to go with liberalism. Lol.
 
Never thought about it in that context before but if ‘liberal’ meant the girls that liked to get high well yeah, they were a lot more fun and not just sex wise, than the ‘never touch the stuff’ stodgy stiffs back in my day. Never thought about it in liberal vs conservative, ah who am I kidding, I never thought about much back then. Peace.
 
bystander said:
Abstinence and sex is as defined by our wives or girlfriends. Whatever they think we're doing; that's what we're doing.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. And this "sex strike" is so idiotic. Did Alyssa Milano consult her husband about this? It reminds me of the idiotic masturbation bans that some feminists have filed. They're trying to frame abortion as a men vs. women issue, and I understand why. Framing the issue that way forces the identity politics angle, which gets people to shut off their brains and approach the issue emotionally and through the lens of tribalism.

The problem is that abortion isn't really a men vs. women battle. If you show up at a pro-life rally, you'll see at least as many women as men. It is more of a single, young women and men vs. married, older women and men.
 
I would think feminists would at least want restrictions on female abortions. But at that point you have to be against aborting either gender or you rightfully come off as a villain.
 
Faecbook became a partisan left organization a long time ago, but this is basically the gauntlet being thrown down:

 
Last edited:
I agree that Twitter is biased to the Left but this isn't a good example. The Tweet is available. Facebook is the platform at fault here. And Zuck really is the worst.
 
Monahorns said:
I agree that Twitter is biased to the Left but this isn't a good example. The Tweet is available. Facebook is the platform at fault here. And Zuck really is the worst.
Click to expand...
However, Twitter HAS banned females for saying much of the same thing. I actually have my account in a 'locked' status by Twitter because I appealed a tweet that noted the lack of due process when certain of the trannies whine and snivel about something a woman has posted. It did not even contain content that ran afoul of their rules, but they are ignoring the appeal in the hopes that I just delete the tweet.

But, making matters worse is that if you appeal one of their claimed objectionable tweets, you cannot even VIEW Twitter while logged in. This makes the tweet in question even more ironic given how I had pointed out the lack of process when it comes to suspensions and removals of content...even worse was that the tweet in question was from mid-November but was not claimed as objectionable for more than five months.

Content: "@Ovalegal @terristrange probably that nerd dude that was all upset because females wouldn't wax his balls...sadly, he gets the providers to kowtow to his claims of digital copyright infringement without any modicum of due process given to the content writers. Just...POOF...and gone. F**k #Yaniv

The individual in question is the same one that crows about getting women like Meghan Murphy removed from Twitter and who filed complaints against waxing salons because they wouldn't wax his genitals. The post had followed, as best I recall, people who were describing some content on other platforms that just disappeared with no right of appeal.
 
mb227 said:
However, Twitter HAS banned females for saying much of the same thing. I actually have my account in a 'locked' status by Twitter because I appealed a tweet that noted the lack of due process when certain of the trannies whine and snivel about something a woman has posted. It did not even contain content that ran afoul of their rules, but they are ignoring the appeal in the hopes that I just delete the tweet.

But, making matters worse is that if you appeal one of their claimed objectionable tweets, you cannot even VIEW Twitter while logged in. This makes the tweet in question even more ironic given how I had pointed out the lack of process when it comes to suspensions and removals of content...even worse was that the tweet in question was from mid-November but was not claimed as objectionable for more than five months.

Content: "@Ovalegal @terristrange probably that nerd dude that was all upset because females wouldn't wax his balls...sadly, he gets the providers to kowtow to his claims of digital copyright infringement without any modicum of due process given to the content writers. Just...POOF...and gone. F**k #Yaniv

The individual in question is the same one that crows about getting women like Meghan Murphy removed from Twitter and who filed complaints against waxing salons because they wouldn't wax his genitals. The post had followed, as best I recall, people who were describing some content on other platforms that just disappeared with no right of appeal.
Click to expand...
God I glad I am not on Twitter
 
Didn't Supreme Court rule against racial types of evaluations for admission into Universities? I remember a certain school being caught up in the case.
 
Monahorns said:
Didn't Supreme Court rule against racial types of evaluations for admission into Universities? I remember a certain school being caught up in the case.
Click to expand...

The Fifth Circuit ruled against UT in the Hopwood case back in the mid '90s. The Supreme Court declined to hear that case, but they heard another case involving the University of Michigan in the early 2000s and upheld race-based admissions. UT has been in the Court more recently (2016), and the Court has ruled with UT. However, two new justices have joined the Court since then. What was a 4-3 ruling in favor of affirmative action could easily become a 6-3 ruling against.
 
Clean said:
That freshman House of Rep. Democrat class of '18 is something else! Now Lauren Underwood of Ill. said that the acting Homeland Security secretary has an intentional policy to let children die at the border! Yeow! Where did they dig these women up? Are there any men in the class and are they just as crazy as the women?

Lauren Underwood rebuked after accusing DHS secretary of killing children
Click to expand...

She's in the Congressional Black Caucus. Yelling inflammatory, stupid **** is what they do. In fact, it's almost the only thing they do.
 
Sangre Naranjada said:
Good for her. You don't fire a 10 year employee over an issue like that. If anything, you tell the other people that she doesn't work Sunday shifts due to earning preference via her seniority.
Click to expand...

And obviously she'll never see $22M or anything close to it. Punitive damages on that case are capped at $300K. They will probably settle with her, but it'll be in the six figures, not seven and certainly not eight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top