racism and being 'WOKE"

[commonsense]

Why?

I thought you might want to dance on the graves. Perhaps you haven't heard the expression.

Why would I want to do that?

Probably because it means to be happy that the person died.

[commonsense]

The great thing about climate change not caused by human activity is that we don't have to do anything.

Why do AJ and you think that climate change has something to do with the OP?

[commonsense]

The great thing about climate change not caused by human activity is that we don't have to do anything.

Why do AJ and you think that climate change has something to do with the OP?

Mea culpa! I myself strayed into a discussion about transgenders.

[Immanuel Can]

The great thing about climate change not caused by human activity is that we don't have to do anything.

Why do AJ and you think that climate change has something to do with the OP?

Mea culpa! I myself strayed into a discussion about transgenders.

Not such a "culpa." Transgenderism and climate crisis are both memes of the Woke Left. The idea that everybody's racist is just another.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

There are thousands upon thousands of transgender and homosexual men and women who live their lives pretty much as those in the "straight" world do. They have jobs and friends and families. They are in committed and loving monogamous relations. They might play sports go to the movies or museums or concerts. They like to fish and hunt and have all sorts of hobbies. They are liberals and conservatives. About the only thing setting them apart is that, for whatever complex personal reasons, sexually, they go off the beaten path.

How do you know this?

And if it's true, then what's all this talk about transgender genocide?

If they are just living normal lives, then what's the problem? Why the activism?

Well, among other things, over the years I have known and interacted with many, many, many of them as a political activist. And in numerous films, books and articles that I have encountered pertaining to the gay community over the years, that is often stressed again and again.

Or have you accumulated evidence that the sort of stuff we get from Satyr and VT is actually the rule instead? Satyr does the same thing with blacks. He scours the internet looking for blacks behaving in a manner that "proves" how superior the white race is. Most of what he posts now is straight out of YouTube land.

And, no, they do not live normal lives...sexually. But they are often mainstream in regard to other aspects of their lives.

But, okay, as with AJ, I'll ask you to note what behaviors, if you were in a position of power in a community, would be prohibited? No gay marriage? No gay clubs? No gay pride parades? Sodomy with become a crime again? Homosexuals and transgenders would be arrested and sent to jail?

Is there a religious -- Christian -- component to your own convictions? Is the manner in which I rooted individual value judgements as an existential component of dasein not applicable at all to you?

And the activism often revolves around the fact that there are reactionaries on the right who really are intent on ridding America of anything that is not straight out of the 1950s Father Knows Best mentality.

Again, often emanating from the politicized -- and sexually repressed? -- evangelical Christian communities.

Again, this part:

Maurice Brinton in The Irrational in Politics:

In learning to obey their parents children learn obedience in general. The deference learned in the family setting will manifest itself whenever the child faces a 'superior' in later life. Sexual repression----by the already sexually repressed parents---is an integral part of the conditioning process.

According to Reich, the 'suppresion of natural sexuality in the child....makes the child apprehensive, shy, obedient, afraid of authority, 'good', and 'adjusted' in the authoritarian sense; it paralyzes the rebellious forces because any rebellion is laden with anxiety; it produces, by inhibiting sexual curiosity and sexual thinking in the child, a general inhibition of thinking and of critical faculties. In brief the goal of sexual repression is that of producing an individual who is adjusted to the authoritarian order and who will submit to it in spite of all the misery and degradation...the result is fear of freedom, and a conservative, reactionary mentality. Sexual repression aids political reaction, not only through this process which makes the mass individual passive and unpolitical, but also by creating in his structure an interest in actively supporting the authoritarian order'.

Psychologists and psychiatrists have written pages about the medical effects of sexual repression. Reich however constantly reiterated its social function, exercised through the family. The purpose of sexual repression was to anchor submission to authority and the fear of freedom into people's 'character armour'. The net result was the reproduction, generation after generation, of the basic [psychological] conditions essential for manipulation and enslavement of the masses.

Some suggest that the "deep state" emanating from Wall Street, K Street, the U.S. Congress and the White House take full advantage of these religious fanatics in order to sustain their own amoral "the rich get richer" economic and political agenda.

Or, should we just stay up in the intellectual clouds until logically and epistemologically we pin down technically how serious philosophers are first obligated to grasp such "deviant" behavior "theoretically"?

Or, as is often the case, will you just configure into Mr. Snippet and Mr. Wiggle in responding to my posts?

Or Mr. Stooge?

I don't 'scour the internet' looking for 'anything'. Where is your evidence that I do? These are facts. You don't have to 'scour' very far to find a man inciting violence against women.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I thought you might want to dance on the graves. Perhaps you haven't heard the expression.

Why would I want to do that?

Probably because it means to be happy that the person died.

There would need to be a mass gravesite in existence for me to be able to do that, even if I wanted to, which I wouldn't.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

This gets more insane by the minute. Does ANYONE here know what's actually going on in the world right now?

It has got so bad, that women are resorting to cutting off their own testicles in anguish.

''Police reopen probe into trans activist after she told crowd to 'punch TERFs in the face': Met reviews Trans Pride speech made by convicted attempted murderer turned campaigner who cut off her own testicles while serving 30 years in prison.''

Now, this is typical of the reactionary Woke mentality...

There are thousands upon thousands of transgender and homosexual men and women who live their lives pretty much as those in the "straight" world do. They have jobs and friends and families. They are in committed and loving monogamous relationships. They might play sports go to the movies or museums or concerts. They like to fish and hunt and have all sorts of hobbies. They are liberals and conservatives. About the only thing setting them apart is that, for whatever complex personal reasons, sexually, they go off the beaten path.

But those folks are basically ignored by the right wing Woke crowd. No, instead, they scour the internet looking only for those really, really off the beaten path "deviants" who do truly extreme or outrageous things.

Worse, every single one of them is intent on "grooming" all of our children to be just like them!!!



There's a new documentary series on HBO: https://www.hbo.com/last-call-when-a-se ... r-new-york

It notes just how far some homophobic folks will go to "save" civilization from these "deviants".

Hitler was only 'one person' too. When 'one person' is tapping into a particular human trait (eg male misogyny in this case) then it's not difficult to see what comes next.
Btw, dipshit, I'm completely without superstition, and politically 'left', because left is more logical, reasonable, workable, and human. Woke is not 'left'. Woke is human insanity.

[iambiguous]

How do you know this?

And if it's true, then what's all this talk about transgender genocide?

If they are just living normal lives, then what's the problem? Why the activism?

Well, among other things, over the years I have known and interacted with many, many, many of them as a political activist. And in numerous films, books and articles that I have encountered pertaining to the gay community over the years, that is often stressed again and again.

Or have you accumulated evidence that the sort of stuff we get from Satyr and VT is actually the rule instead? Satyr does the same thing with blacks. He scours the internet looking for blacks behaving in a manner that "proves" how superior the white race is. Most of what he posts now is straight out of YouTube land.

And, no, they do not live normal lives...sexually. But they are often mainstream in regard to other aspects of their lives.

But, okay, as with AJ, I'll ask you to note what behaviors, if you were in a position of power in a community, would be prohibited? No gay marriage? No gay clubs? No gay pride parades? Sodomy with become a crime again? Homosexuals and transgenders would be arrested and sent to jail?

Is there a religious -- Christian -- component to your own convictions? Is the manner in which I rooted individual value judgements as an existential component of dasein not applicable at all to you?

And the activism often revolves around the fact that there are reactionaries on the right who really are intent on ridding America of anything that is not straight out of the 1950s Father Knows Best mentality.

Again, often emanating from the politicized -- and sexually repressed? -- evangelical Christian communities.

Again, this part:

Maurice Brinton in The Irrational in Politics:

In learning to obey their parents children learn obedience in general. The deference learned in the family setting will manifest itself whenever the child faces a 'superior' in later life. Sexual repression----by the already sexually repressed parents---is an integral part of the conditioning process.

According to Reich, the 'suppresion of natural sexuality in the child....makes the child apprehensive, shy, obedient, afraid of authority, 'good', and 'adjusted' in the authoritarian sense; it paralyzes the rebellious forces because any rebellion is laden with anxiety; it produces, by inhibiting sexual curiosity and sexual thinking in the child, a general inhibition of thinking and of critical faculties. In brief the goal of sexual repression is that of producing an individual who is adjusted to the authoritarian order and who will submit to it in spite of all the misery and degradation...the result is fear of freedom, and a conservative, reactionary mentality. Sexual repression aids political reaction, not only through this process which makes the mass individual passive and unpolitical, but also by creating in his structure an interest in actively supporting the authoritarian order'.

Psychologists and psychiatrists have written pages about the medical effects of sexual repression. Reich however constantly reiterated its social function, exercised through the family. The purpose of sexual repression was to anchor submission to authority and the fear of freedom into people's 'character armour'. The net result was the reproduction, generation after generation, of the basic [psychological] conditions essential for manipulation and enslavement of the masses.

Some suggest that the "deep state" emanating from Wall Street, K Street, the U.S. Congress and the White House take full advantage of these religious fanatics in order to sustain their own amoral "the rich get richer" economic and political agenda.

Or, should we just stay up in the intellectual clouds until logically and epistemologically we pin down technically how serious philosophers are first obligated to grasp such "deviant" behavior "theoretically"?

Or, as is often the case, will you just configure into Mr. Snippet and Mr. Wiggle in responding to my posts?

Or Mr. Stooge?

I don't 'scour the internet' looking for 'anything'. Where is your evidence that I do? These are facts. You don't have to 'scour' very far to find a man inciting violence against women.

Note to others:

You decide if it's not the equivalent of it.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Well, among other things, over the years I have known and interacted with many, many, many of them as a political activist. And in numerous films, books and articles that I have encountered pertaining to the gay community over the years, that is often stressed again and again.

Or have you accumulated evidence that the sort of stuff we get from Satyr and VT is actually the rule instead? Satyr does the same thing with blacks. He scours the internet looking for blacks behaving in a manner that "proves" how superior the white race is. Most of what he posts now is straight out of YouTube land.

And, no, they do not live normal lives...sexually. But they are often mainstream in regard to other aspects of their lives.

But, okay, as with AJ, I'll ask you to note what behaviors, if you were in a position of power in a community, would be prohibited? No gay marriage? No gay clubs? No gay pride parades? Sodomy with become a crime again? Homosexuals and transgenders would be arrested and sent to jail?

Is there a religious -- Christian -- component to your own convictions? Is the manner in which I rooted individual value judgements as an existential component of dasein not applicable at all to you?

And the activism often revolves around the fact that there are reactionaries on the right who really are intent on ridding America of anything that is not straight out of the 1950s Father Knows Best mentality.

Again, often emanating from the politicized -- and sexually repressed? -- evangelical Christian communities.

Again, this part:



Some suggest that the "deep state" emanating from Wall Street, K Street, the U.S. Congress and the White House take full advantage of these religious fanatics in order to sustain their own amoral "the rich get richer" economic and political agenda.

Or, should we just stay up in the intellectual clouds until logically and epistemologically we pin down technically how serious philosophers are first obligated to grasp such "deviant" behavior "theoretically"?

Or, as is often the case, will you just configure into Mr. Snippet and Mr. Wiggle in responding to my posts?

Or Mr. Stooge?

I don't 'scour the internet' looking for 'anything'. Where is your evidence that I do? These are facts. You don't have to 'scour' very far to find a man inciting violence against women.

Note to others:

You decide if it's not the equivalent of it.

What the fuck does that even mean? Why don't you just fuck off with your fucking mental problems?

[iambiguous]

This gets more insane by the minute. Does ANYONE here know what's actually going on in the world right now?

It has got so bad, that women are resorting to cutting off their own testicles in anguish.

''Police reopen probe into trans activist after she told crowd to 'punch TERFs in the face': Met reviews Trans Pride speech made by convicted attempted murderer turned campaigner who cut off her own testicles while serving 30 years in prison.''

Now, this is typical of the reactionary Woke mentality...

There are thousands upon thousands of transgender and homosexual men and women who live their lives pretty much as those in the "straight" world do. They have jobs and friends and families. They are in committed and loving monogamous relationships. They might play sports go to the movies or museums or concerts. They like to fish and hunt and have all sorts of hobbies. They are liberals and conservatives. About the only thing setting them apart is that, for whatever complex personal reasons, sexually, they go off the beaten path.

But those folks are basically ignored by the right wing Woke crowd. No, instead, they scour the internet looking only for those really, really off the beaten path "deviants" who do truly extreme or outrageous things.

Worse, every single one of them is intent on "grooming" all of our children to be just like them!!!



There's a new documentary series on HBO: https://www.hbo.com/last-call-when-a-se ... r-new-york

It notes just how far some homophobic folks will go to "save" civilization from these "deviants".

Hitler was only 'one person' too. When 'one person' is tapping into a particular human trait (eg male misogyny in this case) then it's not difficult to see what comes next.
Btw, dipshit, I'm completely without superstition, and politically 'left', because left is more logical, reasonable, workable, and human. Woke is not 'left'. Woke is human insanity.

But what a "one person" he was to those that he himself went full-blown Woke against!

Just out of curiosity, as I asked AJ and phyllo, if you were in power in a community what would be the fate of transgenders? And are all of them the same to you, or do you reject only those biological males who "think" they are a women and demand to frequent women's bathrooms and to play in women's sports.

And, again, I generally agree with you in regard to those things. The same with some of the things that are unfolding in regard to kids here. And fuck the role that the "show me the money" medical industrial complex/Big Pharma plays here.

Finally, there is left-wing woke and right-wing woke. Depending on the issue and on the context. But one thing that I have found that almost all of them share in common is that they are fiercely fanatic "my way or the highways" moral objectivists. My own rendition of "dipshits" by the way.

Also, I attempt to nudge them into grappling with how otheir own political prejudices are rooted existentially in dasein. Re this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

But for those transgenders who do not seek to impose their own lifestyle or frame of mind on others, sure, why not.

And men...do you see all of them as basically misogynists, or, in fact, are a considerable portion of them not at all out to destroy the lives of women.

Next up: Society for Cutting Up Men?

Does that ring your bell...float your boat?

[iambiguous]

I don't 'scour the internet' looking for 'anything'. Where is your evidence that I do? These are facts. You don't have to 'scour' very far to find a man inciting violence against women.

Note to others:

You decide if it's not the equivalent of it.

What the fuck does that even mean? Why don't you just fuck off with your fucking mental problems?

Note to others:

You decide if this tells us more about her than about me.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

[iambiguous]

Wow, that works for me too!!!

[Alexis Jacobi]

Unrelated News

Prompted by Celestial Power I have begun my search for the Philosopher’s Stone! and that fabled endeavor of turning base metal into consciousness-infused Gold.

Naturally, I’ll keep y’all informed!

(NB: I have a Patreon account).

[Gary Childress]

It seems to me that some progress is being made.

You're being misled, I'm afraid. The facts are otherwise. Check them out for yourself.

Well, the air quality isn't as bad in various ways as it was around the beginning of the industrial revolution when coal produced enormous amounts of soot and smog in the air. During the Trump presidency, some were touting coal as potentially "clean" energy. when Covid basically shut down air travel and other consumption, there were apparently signs that air quality in some places had improved slightly. That seems to indicate that such human activities do indeed have a significant impact on air quality, and therefore potentially climate as well.

While I feel I have a healthy degree of skepticism over the various offerings of "evidence" that proponents and critics of the climate debate offer, I assume it's fair to say that progress has been made to the point where people have become aware of the effects of human emissions. Your cock sure position seems likely unwarranted to me, indeed it appears as fanatical as your religious convictions. Unless you are a professional in some field related to climate science, then I'd say you are beyond your scope of credibility to have such certainty. But that never seems to stop you from making fanatical assertions to one degree or another. Personally, I'd prefer it if you exercised more restraint in your convictions, but I suppose you are going to do you regardless.