The BlueSwan Basement of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VIII

[BlueSwan]

Could we also not call people who are sexually attracted to 16 year olds pedophiles, please?

A pedophile in medical/psychiatric terms is someone who is sexually attracted to prepubescent kids, not to 16 year olds who in any biological sense are adults, if not in a mental sense.

That post is 100% true.

[BlueSwan]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

[BlueSwan]

Also, as for the header of this thread. Somebody please show me where my posts were either absurd or ignorant.

[BlueSwan]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

This is irrelevant breeder sh!t to me, but "I just wish that women noticed me for my good behavior!!!" is textbook incel sh!t, Jack.

Except I didn't write that. I am happily married with three kids. I don't care very much about women noticing me.

The "Incel community" believes all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like the whole "black pill" philosophy, which is just plain wrong and defeatist. Also, many of them have abhorrent misogynist views. I am a lifelong feminist.

Basically, I am getting flack for some basic claims rooted in pretty established evolutionary psychology, which I also happen to teach. I have never been of the opinion that facts should just be wished away. Furthermore, I see no discrepancy between being a feminist and also believing in the existence of fairly deep-rooted human instincts that results in some often pretty unfortunate human behaviour patterns.

[BlueSwan]

I'd challenge anybody to an honest intellectual debate about these things. The only responses I have gotten are people resorting to balling me a misogynist, or an incel or defending rapists. All of those claims are ridiculous. I am a lifelong feminist. I find the "incel community" abhorrent and just plain wrong in their worldviews. And I of course would never defend rapists.

This is irrelevant breeder sh!t to me, but "I just wish that women noticed me for my good behavior!!!" is textbook incel sh!t, Jack.

Except I didn't write that. I am happily married with three kids. I don't care very much about women noticing me.

The "Incel community" believes all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like the whole "black pill" philosophy, which is just plain wrong and defeatist. Also, many of them have abhorrent misogynist views. I am a lifelong feminist.

Basically, I am getting flack for some basic claims rooted in pretty established evolutionary psychology, which I also happen to teach. I have never been of the opinion that facts should just be wished away. Furthermore, I see no discrepancy between being a feminist and also believing in the existence of fairly deep-rooted human instincts that results in some often pretty unfortunate human behaviour patterns.

I have not read through all of this, but I think the flak you're getting is more because you were playing rape apologist for Biden (under the hypothetical that he actually did what is alleged, which he didn't).

I think one would only get that from my posts if they were intent on reading that into it. This is sometimes the problem with online discussions. I am pretty confident that if we had this discussion in real life nobody in their right mind would ever consider me to be a "rape apologist".

[BlueSwan]

I think one would only get that from my posts if they were intent on reading that into it. This is sometimes the problem with online discussions. I am pretty confident that if we had this discussion in real life nobody in their right mind would ever consider me to be a "rape apologist".

Ok, "rape" is the wrong word to use, I'll agree with that. And you do say a lot of things that are unfortunate truths. The one that I find the most objectionable is this:

Rape is one thing (and I most certainly do not consider this to be rape, no more than a woman grabbing a man's penis should be considered rape), but typical male sexual aggressiveness should not be considered disqualifying IMO. And that includes a lot of the creepy stuff Donald Trump has done (again, excluding the actual rape accusations).

I have debated with myself for some time how to react to the MeToo movement's attitude towards this sort of behavior. I do not like the idea of subjecting people to the justice of the mob, and I don't like passing judgement on people who are accused of sexual misconduct when there is no substantive evidence against them. But at some point I had to ask myself... why should I bother defending guys who behave this way? I've known dudes like Trump in real life; I think they spawn on damp towels in gym locker rooms. I've never liked them and their sadistic frat-boy attitudes, and I've always wanted them to get what's coming to them. The fact that Trump was caught on tape talking about grabbing women's crotches waylays any doubts I might have had about the veracity of the accusations, too. So I absolutely think that his actions are disqualifying, and not at all "typical" of male sexual displays.

I generally agree. The main disagreement regards whether ill behaviour in ones personal life should be considered disqualifying for political office and this I don’t think is a black or white issue. I don’t personally think Al Franken grabbing someones behind while taking a photo is disqualifying. Is it stupid, absolutely, but disqualifying? I say let the voters decide. I generally don’t think what people did in high school or in college while young, dumb and drunk, should be disqualifying decades later. I don’t think Bill Clinton engaging in consensual sexual acts with an intern should be disqualifying. Let the voters decide.

[BlueSwan]

With zero due respect, if you aren't voting for Biden, shut the hell up about the protests.

You don't care.  You are just a poser.  You are pretending to care for credibility.  But you don't give enough of a damn to sacrifice your precious sanctity, your precious moral purity.  That shows where your priorities truly are.  Selfish sanctimony comes first.  Actually helping the oppressed, somewhere further down.

We live in a democratic republic where individual power is wielded through the election of officials who enact changes on our behalf.  There is exactly ONE way to get real, permanent, meaningful change in this country, and that is to put officials in office who are committed to bringing about that change.  What this means is that there is ONE thing you can do this year to actually help black lives, and that is to vote straight Democrat all the way down your ballot, from Biden on down to dogcatcher.

"But the root of the problem is capitalism!"  I guess the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1864 accomplished nothing for black people then.  I guess the election of Lyndon Johnson in 1964 accomplished nothing.  I guess the election of Barack Obama in 2008 accomplished nothing.  Because none of those presidents dismantled capitalism so electing them was just a waste of time.  Thank you for lecturing black people on what real progress means!  I guess all

If you're voting Green, or voting Lib, or abstaining, or some other masturbatory action, that says everything about you.  You pretend to care about black lives.  You pretend to listen to what they have to say.  But when given the option to actually help them, at the cost of nothing but your precious ego, you proudly say "nope, can't help you with that one chief."

I would 100% cosign MacArthurs post. Nothing absurd about it whatsoever.