And that's better somehow? The question is, why should anybody treat your position with the good faith you're unwilling to show?
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Do we need to pull up a map of minimum wages across the US?
Let's just deal with this
Did you lie about the 2020 census data, use a different year or just put the Latinos in with the white?
Because the number you stated is only possible under one of these situations
Trump before the tariffs: "You'll all be so rich, you won't know how to spend all the money."
Trump after the tariffs: "Well, you're going to have to get comfortable with not being able to afford as many things."
It's the most blatant 180-degree turn possible, and you're here with a protractor whining "ackshually, guyz, it's 162.7 degrees and that means I'm smarter than all of you".
Did you read the comments before mine that inspired it?
Put it against the map of cost of living across the US. Or how about home ownership by state, that one's even better. The nominal minimum wage does not translate to meaningful spending power.
The standard you want to hold yourself to is "more consistent than Donald Trump"? Is that success for you? You pursue no values other than beating the guy you hate, It's hard to see you as anything other than purely driven by resentment
No, paraphrased.
I ask because it is quite easy to think "There are reasons I consider good to do [this policy], and because the people I like do it I assume they are using these reasons." while in reality those are not the reasons they do it.
seems to be its the other way around and that it’s Trump supporters who base their argument purely about whether Trump or someone else does it.
For years they shouted “but her emails!” Yet when that drunk defense minister insist on consistently using unsecured lines it’s suddenly no biggie, not even if he adds completely random people to war discussions.
They loved painting their support of Trump as revenge for the high prices under Biden with the pretty open admission they don’t find it relevant Biden wasn’t even the cause of the post COVID chaos bringing about these prices. But then Trump putting an aditional tax on goods(which is what tariffs are) then suddenly prices don’t matter anymore.
With Gaza Trump eve ln got his base to admit they support Bush era talking points as long as Trump is saying then, despite swearing they hated Bush. For all their talk about Trump being some supremely peaceful president they were also very quick to cheer on his aspiration to steal Greenland and Canada.
The whole NPC meme seems appropriate with Trump supporter’s opportunistically adopting and dropping talking points depending on their programming.
Last edited:
Although my comment was meant light-heartedly, at the same time there is a serious barb in there. It is based around the association that dolls have long been believed a way of helping bring up girls into the culture of child-raising and caring - many essentially being role-modelling tools, babies or toddlers where girls can imitate being a mother. Secondly, the very hard to miss trend in the US right to return women to traditional gender roles, for instance via the tradwife movement, and/or aggressive cultural push through both traditional magazines ("Evie") and more modern internet-based influencers (Candace Owens, Brett Cooper).
Now admittedly, the Trump administration is not likely to very overtly push reactionary gender roles because it's a vote loser. No, that's what all the above underlying culture war stuff that conservative (and often Christian) funding and is about: preparing the ground so that in maybe 10-20 years time, a conservative president can tell women to obey their men and get back in the kitchen / bedroom, and it might win more votes than it loses. This is the culture war. These people don't want to stop feminism or the trans rights movement progressing, they want to roll the clock back, and it seems to me they are looking at somewhere around the 1950s.
It's not to say that's where the Republican Party as a whole is at, but it's a pretty strong strong bloc in the Republican big tent, tolerated and sometimes indulged. This bloc could not make it plainer that they wish their vision of women as submissive, home-orientated baby-makers to be the general reality. Every person in the country, left or right, who wants women to be free to choose their path through life without discrimination and disadvantage should be keeping a very careful eye on them.
There is absolutely zero way that is what the Republicans think at all, as a whole.
After all, it has aggressively pursued decades of precisely this tactic, moving manufacturing overseas to places with far lower salaries and employment regulations in order to make goods cheaper for American citizens. For way over a century, it has generally resisted all sorts of measures for labour regulations to improve the salaries and working conditions even for Americans, both to encourage capitalist profits and selling the idea to the public with cheaper goods.
And the Republicans are still all about vast capitalist profits (and cheap goods), made by workers who get as little as possible for their labour. After all, Trump isn't appealing to objections against consumerism and the rock-bottom wages and labour regulations of foreign countries. No, he's simply appealing to nationalism, with some hopelessly wrong notion of how trade and economies work.
Well, I watched Bessent give a tone-deaf answer to the question, and then a few posters characterised MAGA Republicans as having archaic views of a woman's role, which I'd say is pretty accurate. Nothing as off-target as what you said anyway.
This is a distraction anyway. You moaned that people were mischaracterising their opponents, immediately after mischaracterising your opponents. That's what happened and the hypocrisy is really all I'm pointing out.
It is, but more interesting to me is how easy it seems for people to think "the people I don't like are doing this policy, it must be a bad policy".
There is always a "they", that is for certain. The things you are saying are accurate about someone somewhere. I don't know if there's a single real individual that would line up with everything you're saying, but taken individually, each of them definitely applies to someone. There are certainly hypocrites. But there is also a ton of disagreement and disapproval from even Trump's supporters over lots of these things. People who like tariffs are mostly unhappy being involved in Gaza. Lots of people who were against Hillary's email server are also condemning the loose communication of this administration.
There certainly is a "they" out there, my concern here is your willingness to be a part of that "they". Flip these points, are you consistent? Do you condemn Trump's people for their communication but think Clinton was a nothingburger? Do you think prices are a reason to be upset at Trump now but shouldn't have been an issue under Biden? Are you sure you're not the "they" following the programming, just the other side?
I think you are foolish if you think "home-oriented baby-maker" is a submissive position. Motherhood is the most inherent position of authority in human civilization, and among the most respected, and in its place, the feminism you desire pressures women into competing against men in specifically the arenas where men are currently advantaged. It's like if half the world was 5 feet tall and the other half was 7, and you told the short ones that gymnastics is stupid and demeaning, they can only be respected if they play basketball, and then got mad at me for respecting gymnastics.
That isn't my point. My point is about what you think. There are a dozen reasons within your own stated positions that you could be actively supportive of the US decoupling from China, but instead you're spending time rationalizing misogyny into the motives.
Oh, I'm not moaning about mischaracterizing. That word implies an intent, a deliberate tactic which can be used for good or for bad. Sometimes a more meaningful argument can be made with a contrafactual.
Trunkage isn't doing that. Trunkage is coming from a place of ignorance.
Yeah, this is just like what a load of medieval societies said - orWahhabi Islam and the Taliban. It requires warping of any understanding of what authority and respect mean to gibberish. Like those remote parts of Pakistan where tribal courts order women to be gang-raped when a male relative commits a crime, because of the rationale that women hold the honour of the family.
One actually looks at how human civilisations have more commonly treated women - mothers - and you get the real idea: women as property, expected to be absolutely obedient under threat of physical violence or abandonment, mothers dispossessed of their children whenever it has suited a man to want so. Authority that is utterly conditional on the whim of the father / husband / closest male relative / liege-lord is not a woman's authority, it is just a man's authority on loan.
People like you will always be able to make up a reason why you think women cannot compete so you can squash them into the box you want. Thus you will only ever be an apologist for discrimination.
It's literally the first Google result when searching "white population in us".
White Americans - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Whatever. Fact remains that you can't genuinely gripe when you're intentionally doing the same or worse immediately prior.
Remember that in one of our past discussions about trans issues, you would say that someone's sex should not determine their role, presentation, etc-- and that people of either sex should be equally free to present and pursue what they want regardless of societal expectations of sex/gender. At the time this was a convenient way for you to try to delegitimise the wish to transition.
Of course, that sexual egalitarianism turned out to be hollow shortly after. But here you are again showing the lie in what you said: arguing that the sexes would do better to stay in their lanes (even comparing it to a massive innate advantage!) and defending political efforts to railroad women into traditional gender roles.
Last edited:
I'll just run that through my translator
Seems par for the course.
Apparently, the 2020 Census includes Latino and Hispanic people, as well as middle Eastern, north African and Arabic people as White.
Firstly there are some key differences there. Biden was not the cause of the damage inflicted by covid and word abroad is he pulled America through it better then the leaders of other countries did theirs. Trump however is the direct cause of any price hike that are caused by his tariffs. A difference is also that Clinton did get investigated and a ruling was made over it, unlike with the drunk where it seems its just shrugged off, for him at least.
As for the principle of it. There are some mitigating factors like she at least not literally being inside the Kremlin when using an unsafe connection. That we know of at least. But ultimately no, I don't think it was a nothing burger and that some degree of punishment would indeed have been appropriate. Just not presidential crushing ones, especially given its at least peanuts when comparing it to the career crook she was up against.
I highly doubt he's actually gonna try that. This is ironic coming from the guy that leaches off of everybody else,and has not done anything useful.