Should every woman have a gun?

[Central Slavia]

Stop this. You said "the problem is men". You know you said that. You know that it's perfectly reasonable for people to object to being called " the problem". I'm not sure whether you chose your words poorly and are now trying to distract from said poor wording by being an arse, or whether you're just bigoted. Either way, stop this.

I choose my words perfectly well. I write what I mean and I stand by it.

The problem is with men. And the point is that it's ludicrous to suggest that women should have to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from men.

If a man, any man, compliments me or randomly starts talking to me in the street I have no idea, and have no way of knowing, if he's someone who might get violent if I reject him. This is why it doesn't matter if individual men wouldn't be. I have no idea whether an individual man would be or not, but men as a class certainly pose a danger to me as I try to go about my life.

Ever heard the quote "men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them"?

Its absolutely true.

The problem is with men as a class. Maybe start educating your fellow men rather that jumping around shouting "not all men!!"

But keep having fun with your little distraction

I choose my words perfectly well. I write what I mean and I stand by it.

The problem is with blacks. And the point is that it's ludicrous to suggest that whites should have to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from blacks.

If a black, any black, approaches me or randomly starts talking to me in the street I have no idea, and have no way of knowing, if he's someone who might get violent and mug me. This is why it doesn't matter if individual blacks wouldn't be. I have no idea whether an individual black would be or not, but blacks as a class certainly pose a danger to me as I try to go about my life.

Ever heard the quote "blacks are afraid whitey won't give them a job, whites are afraid blacks will mug them"?

Its absolutely true.

The problem is with blacks as a class. Maybe start educating your fellow blacks rather that jumping around shouting "not all blacks!!"

But keep having fun with your little distraction

[Conserative Morality]

Yes, because I am a male, I will kill you because you rejected me. It's just in my nature...

Speaking as someone who is often rubbed the wrong way by Nadkor, that's not at all what she's saying. Reread the post.

[Nadkor]

I choose my words perfectly well. I write what I mean and I stand by it.

The problem is with men. And the point is that it's ludicrous to suggest that women should have to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from men.

If a man, any man, compliments me or randomly starts talking to me in the street I have no idea, and have no way of knowing, if he's someone who might get violent if I reject him. This is why it doesn't matter if individual men wouldn't be. I have no idea whether an individual man would be or not, but men as a class certainly pose a danger to me as I try to go about my life.

Ever heard the quote "men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them"?

Its absolutely true.

The problem is with men as a class. Maybe start educating your fellow men rather that jumping around shouting "not all men!!"

But keep having fun with your little distraction

Yes, because I am a male, I will kill you because you rejected me. It's just in my nature...

Because you are a male I have no idea when you approach me with an unsolicited compliment as a stranger if you will turn violent towards me or not

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

The topic. Kindly get back on it and cut out the textual dickfencing, please.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

How is solely validating the Western conception of culturally defined social constructs not colonialist genderism?

How is using one trait to define entire classes regardless of differences not exactly the same as white colonialist genderism?

I might be doing it, but patriarchy is a construct inherent to most present societies with a nation-state.

Furthermore, I mostly speak for issues that are of concern in the gender relations we have in the Americas.

[Spoder]

And in homogeneous societies like Korea and Japan, they hate the Koreans, the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Phillipinos. Yet none of that is the fault of white colonialism.

Indeed it isn't. But what about Indians, Vietnamese, Thais, Mongols?

The sentiment of third world = ethnic ghettos problematic to society = unwelcome leeches is inherent to much of the nationalism of these places too.

First, Second and Third world are all denominations that were created during the cold war for identification of a nation's allegiance during the Cold War.

The connotation stems from I don't even know fucking where.

[Spoder]

The topic. Kindly get back on it and cut out the textual dickfencing, please.

Yes let us please get back on topic.

I don't see the reasoning behind the topic, because almost anybody and everybody can purchase a firearm in the U.S. Forcing them to do so is authoritarianism.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

First, Second and Third world are all denominations that were created during the cold war for identification of a nation's allegiance during the Cold War.

The connotation stems from I don't even know fucking where.

It's the pejorative term in common use. Yes, I know "underdeveloped countries" is ideal, but I might be lazy.

Furthermore, I can use whatever term I want to without it being really problematic because I'm from Brazil and not from the upper classes.

[Conserative Morality]

Indeed it isn't. But what about Indians, Vietnamese, Thais, Mongols?

If you mean people on the Indian subcontinent - that's a pretty damn diverse group (To the point where grouping them as any sort of homogeneous class is ridiculous) also with a long history of hating each other, just like Europeans. The Vietnamese? Thais? Mongols? What about them? Most ethnicities have old blood feuds; it's the nature of the old world.

The sentiment of third world = ethnic ghettos problematic to society = unwelcome leeches is inherent to much of the nationalism of these places too.

Yeah, it is. Which makes said nationalists pretty racist. Your point, other than undermining your own point?

[Nadkor]

Not all feminists.

The truth comes out.

Ah, come on now. That one was too good an opportunity to pass up.

[Stormaen]

Pepper spray os cheaper, more convenient and doesn't require waiting periods or background checks...

[Jordsindia]

Yes, because I am a male, I will kill you because you rejected me. It's just in my nature...

Because you are a male I have no idea when you approach me with an unsolicited compliment as a stranger if you will turn violent towards me or not

So you wouldn't do that when a woman comes up too you and does that? It is solely because I am a man that you fear me?

[Lingang]

Because you are a male I have no idea when you approach me with an unsolicited compliment as a stranger if you will turn violent towards me or not

So you wouldn't do that when a woman comes up too you and does that? It is solely because I am a man that you fear me?

That's the gist of it.

[Conserative Morality]

It's the pejorative term in common use. Yes, I know "underdeveloped countries" is ideal, but I might be lazy.

'Developing countries'.

Furthermore, I can use whatever term I want to without it being really problematic because I'm from Brazil and not from the upper classes.

Ah ha ha ha.

No.

Just like you can't go around calling people 'Japs' or 'Chinks' because you're a Brazilian, you don't get a free pass with the negative terminology towards any oppressed people other than your own, and there are plenty who would argue that even using the terminology against one's own class is problematic.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

New Aerios, Spoder and Conservative Morality might take the subject to the LGBT rights thread.

Me discussing sexism and racism is prone to failures anyway, as I'm white and read as male.

[Spoder]

Can we seriously get back on topic?

I get really angry when threads get locked because of this shit.

[Conserative Morality]

New Aerios, Spoder and Conservative Morality might take the subject to the LGBT rights thread.

Me discussing sexism and racism is prone to failures anyway, as I'm white and read as male.

This should probably go in a thread of its own, come to think of it. The topic is broader than just LGBT rights.

[Estado Nacional]

Also, heterophobia and cisphobia are fun.

This right here is why I'm not going to take you seriously any more.

you took too long, imo.

[Nadkor]

Because you are a male I have no idea when you approach me with an unsolicited compliment as a stranger if you will turn violent towards me or not

So you wouldn't do that when a woman comes up too you and does that? It is solely because I am a man that you fear me?

If and when a) women coming up to me and complimenting me in a creepy way on how nice my smile is, and b) there is a widespread undercurrent of violence by women against women for rejecting these unsolicited advances, then yeah. Maybe I'd be wary of women.

But this is real life, and neither a) nor b) are things.

They are with men.

[T Roosevelt]

The topic. Kindly get back on it and cut out the textual dickfencing, please.

Yes let us please get back on topic.

I don't see the reasoning behind the topic, because almost anybody and everybody can purchase a firearm in the U.S. Forcing them to do so is authoritarianism.

I didn't say that almost anybody and everybody should purchase a firearm in the United States even though they should have access to them. Public distribution of firearms is not authoritarianism.

[Conserative Morality]

I didn't say that almost anybody and everybody should purchase a firearm in the United States even though they should have access to them. Public distribution of firearms is not authoritarianism.

But forcing people to own a gun against their will is authoritarianism.

[MERIZoC]

That tackles the problem in exactly the wrong way. All women carrying guns just creates a culture of fear, for them as well. Women shouldn't have to feel like they need a firearm to protect themselves. It seems to me like the biggest problem is harassment, which, wile rude, is certainly not a shootable action.

[Spoder]

So you wouldn't do that when a woman comes up too you and does that? It is solely because I am a man that you fear me?

If and when a) women coming up to me and complimenting me in a creepy way on how nice my smile is, and b) there is a widespread undercurrent of violence by women against women for rejecting these unsolicited advances, then yeah. Maybe I'd be wary of women.

But this is real life, and neither a) nor b) are things.

They are with men.

That is binarist, sexist and a cisgendered opinion.

[New Aerios]

Yes let us please get back on topic.

I don't see the reasoning behind the topic, because almost anybody and everybody can purchase a firearm in the U.S. Forcing them to do so is authoritarianism.

I didn't say that almost anybody and everybody should purchase a firearm in the United States even though they should have access to them. Public distribution of firearms is not authoritarianism.

Taking away an individuals choice in order to enforce your own views is authoritarianism. Forcing someone who doesn't want a gun to carry a gun is just as authoritarian as forcibly removing a gun from someone who does want one.

[Nadkor]

So you wouldn't do that when a woman comes up too you and does that? It is solely because I am a man that you fear me?

That's the gist of it.

I wouldn't fear him just because he's a man. That would be preposterous.

I would fear him because men regularly turn violent when their advances are rebuffed, and he's a man. And I'm not about to play Russian roulette