NSG, extraordinarily liberal?

[Prussia-Steinbach]

2. No, it's because they aren't fucking pregnant and they don't fucking have to push a fucking child out of their fucking vagina.

4. That is not what I fucking said and you know it.

2. Exactly. So an inherent bias against gender based solely on physical characteristics. I think we should go back to banning women from combat, since physically they are weaker than men on average and have slower average mile times.

4. So what are you saying? You certainly don't seem to be acknowledging the bias against male victims.

2. Because of the fucking physical trauma women endure. You're being deliberately dense. And I acknowledge the logic in your second point and don't have a strong opinion on it.

4. omfg

[Mysterious Stranger]

But women make up 50% of the population of the United States. Whites aren't overrepresented among rape victims, they're underrepresented. But women are overrepresented by an enormous margin. If criminals are systematically targeting one particular demographic in this country, and we're not stopping it, that's an enormous problem. Still more so if many, many anaylists have been trying to blow the whistle that the way we treat that demographic in our culture is closely tied to it.

White non-Hispanics make up 63% of the US population.
They make up 80% of rape victims.

How is that underrepresentation? That's almost 33% more than expected!

See for yourself.
Sparknotes version: 83.5% of the U.S. population is white, and 82.5% of rape victims are white, 12.3% of the population is black, and 13.3% of victims are black, and blacks are 10% more likely to be raped than whites.

[Excidium Planetis]

White non-Hispanics make up 63% of the US population.
They make up 80% of rape victims.

How is that underrepresentation? That's almost 33% more than expected!

I'd like to see a statistic for the color of the rapists.

According to RAINN (which you cited earlier), only 52% of rapists are white, an underrepresentation considering 63% of the US is non-Hispanic White.
https://rainn.org/get-information/stati ... -offenders

[Excidium Planetis]

White non-Hispanics make up 63% of the US population.
They make up 80% of rape victims.

How is that underrepresentation? That's almost 33% more than expected!

See for yourself.
Sparknotes version: 83.5% of the U.S. population is white, and 82.5% of rape victims are white, 12.3% of the population is black, and 13.3% of victims are black, and blacks are 10% more likely to be raped than whites.

That statistic includes Hispanics. Non-Hispanic whites only make up 63% of the population.

[Mysterious Stranger]

See for yourself.
Sparknotes version: 83.5% of the U.S. population is white, and 82.5% of rape victims are white, 12.3% of the population is black, and 13.3% of victims are black, and blacks are 10% more likely to be raped than whites.

That statistic includes Hispanics. Non-Hispanic whites only make up 63% of the population.

Yep.

[Mushet]

If there is one thing that is almost taboo to be though, its anarchist. You cannot start an anarchist thread and not have 90% of the people there just going there to say that they disagree with it.

Actually, speaking as an anarchist, I really don't think that's the case. There are quite a few of us on here, and though many people might disagree with us, most of them are willing to still have a discussion about it.

If I recall correctly that discussion involves many who decide to use the same old tropes against a set of ideologies that they didn't bother to read the Wikipedia article on, I mean people do the same with non-anarchist strains of socialism and communism but it's not to the same extent.

[Excidium Planetis]

That statistic includes Hispanics. Non-Hispanic whites only make up 63% of the population.

Yep.

Check out this study:
dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3856&context=etd
It states that men are raped with the same frequency as women, but most go unreported. A survey revealed as many as 12-16% of college men reported being serially victimized, only 1% lower than college women.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

If there is one thing that is almost taboo to be though, its anarchist. You cannot start an anarchist thread and not have 90% of the people there just going there to say that they disagree with it.

Actually, speaking as an anarchist, I really don't think that's the case. There are quite a few of us on here, and though many people might disagree with us, most of them are willing to still have a discussion about it.

Agreed. And the number has definitely gone way up since I came back.

I can't remember a single anarchist on the forums regularly in 2012. Now there's at least five or six. Big improvement. Honesty, no political ideology is "taboo" on NSG, but I'd say the most unaccepted ones are Nazism and Stalinism.

[Excidium Planetis]

You never denied it Prussia, but you sure didn't agree with it, nor have you been willing to agree, and you aren't open to discussing it either, apparently. What's so hard? If there is a bias against male victims, and you aren't denying it, why not agree? Because it contradicts your view of America as a place where women are opprssed?

If there is no bias, then why are you not denying it?

[Reploid Productions]

Psssst! Guys! Feminism ain't the thread topic!

[AiliailiA]

Yep.

Check out this study:
dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3856&context=etd
It states that men are raped with the same frequency as women, but most go unreported. A survey revealed as many as 12-16% of college men reported being serially victimized, only 1% lower than college women.

The link is broken. Is it meant to point to "Assessing Victim Blame ..." by Kirsten Ann Piatak?

[AiliailiA]

Psssst! Guys! Feminism ain't the thread topic!

You killed the OP. May as well lock the thread now.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

I can't remember a single anarchist on the forums regularly in 2012. Now there's at least five or six. Big improvement. Honesty, no political ideology is "taboo" on NSG, but I'd say the most unaccepted ones are Nazism and Stalinism.

Really, that's just because it's really hard to justify ideologies that lead directly to millions of deaths. You either have to deny well documented history, or look like a horrible monster.

[Uawc]

The world as a whole is becoming more liberal as populations become more educated; archaic ideas like religion and bigotry are on the way out.

[New Skaaneland]

Bullshit.

[Liptan]

This might be an illustrative case for why that philosophy has certain limitations, though, because Albion didn't actually say he didn't think women were equals. That's an assumption, but it might or might not be accurate. It's possible that he simply disagrees with your assessment that "thinking women are equals implies supporting abortion." Now, he might or might not be correct about that, but if your reason for justifying demonizing him is that he doesn't think women are equal, that might not actually be true. So that becomes the problem. What's understood and expressed as "I will gladly demonize those who do not think women are equals" kind of has this unspoken assumption that "I know who thinks women are equals without asking them," making it in practice "I will gladly demonize those who I expect or I assume do not think women are equals," which, I think, is a somewhat weaker statement.

It wasn't the abortion statement that prompted that, it was not supporting feminism.

The problem is male and women aren't equal, at least not in the legitimate sense of the word. They're different and it's impossible to treat them exactly the same. The very fact that they are of two different genders makes then liable to inequality, the most basic game theory and economic reasoning is needed to understand this.

The feminism movement traditionally has a very good gold held in mind, and they delivered. So it faded away. Equality before the law, the modern feminism movement does not do that, it is essentially devolved to women pride as there are no genuine points women can refer to in which men and women are not equal before the law.

Men however, have double standards in the eyes of crime. 90% of female rapists are never convicted and in one case a woman raped a man and forced him to pay for Child support.

We need masculinism movements tbh.

The modern day feminism movement is grounded in a reaction to contemporary traditionalist embodied by the GOP. That's ok, to suggest it is grounded in equality though is a complete and utter farce.

It's a culture war, which is why they are paling in comparison to LGBTQ, because LGBTQ is grounded in civil rights, not culture clashes or reassigning principles.

[Liptan]

2. Exactly. So an inherent bias against gender based solely on physical characteristics. I think we should go back to banning women from combat, since physically they are weaker than men on average and have slower average mile times.

4. So what are you saying? You certainly don't seem to be acknowledging the bias against male victims.

2. Because of the fucking physical trauma women endure. You're being deliberately dense. And I acknowledge the logic in your second point and don't have a strong opinion on it.

4. omfg

Yes, Women are prone to different things than men. They are different, and in practicing and cultural circumstances they should be treated as women.

Before the law, we have already achieved equaliy.

[Old Tyrannia]

General has always been dominated by people with left-of-centre, socially liberal viewpoints. I dispute the suggestion that it is gradually becoming more right-wing; I seem to remember a phase a few years back where we had a pretty significant contingent of right-libertarians, most of whom have moved on or changed their views. That said, it is true that conservatives don't tend to get dogpiled as badly as in the past.

[Liptan]

Oh, so your objection was to the second part "and feminism?" That makes sense.
So your thinking is basically:
1. OP said that they exclude feminism
2. The dictionary definition of feminism involves thinking that women are the equals of men
3. Op thinks that women are not the equals of men.
That's certainly a reasonable chain of logic. In this case, though, I wonder (and I can only speculate, unfortunately, since he's gone) whether OP might have been thinking more in terms of the living and spontaneous element of language, where words can take on different "meanings" in different contexts, especially in politics, and take on various connotations or serve as group identifiers according to the actions of people in real time. I've certainly met a lot of people who had become alienated by what a group of people calling themselves feminists and using the word feminist had been saying, (which wasn't necessarily the same as the dictionary definition of feminism) and felt the word feminist had taken on a connotation in a lot of people's minds that they didn't agree with, but who agree with the dictionary definition of the term, (namely, equality of men and women). For example, in my daily life I usually specify that I'm a "libertarian socialist" rather than just saying "communist" and that I'm an "anarcho-pacifist" or "Christian anarchist" rather than just "anarchist," not because I actually think that the dictionary definitions of "communist" or "anarchist" don't accurately describe my views (they do), but because a lot of people associate the term "communist" with "marxist-leninist" and "anarchist" with "egoist anarchist." I feel that I have an obligation to speak in terms of how I expect to be understood. For example, I've frequently argued with people who thought that there was nothing wrong with displaying the confederate flag because they didn't mean to communicate racism by it, that the standard for communication isn't "what you meant" but rather "how you had reasonable cause to assume that others would understand you;" in other words, that what the listener thinks words mean is the basis of communication. In light of that principle, I might question whether words each have a single, essential meaning no matter where they are used. Instead, I'm prepared to accept the possibility that the same word might mean different things in different contexts and places at the same time based on differences in how it's understood. I think that's especially true for political symbols, because they are often used as group identifiers representing a particular broad group of people more strongly than a particular concept.

I didn't actually think he is against equality of the sexes. I'm just a sarcastic asshole who has a thing for the English language and likes to ensure accuracy of word definitions.

In which case, your opinion is invalid and this could categorize as flame baiting.

[Liptan]

General has always been dominated by people with left-of-centre, socially liberal viewpoints. I dispute the suggestion that it is gradually becoming more right-wing; I seem to remember a phase a few years back where we had a pretty significant contingent of right-libertarians, most of whom have moved on or changed their views. That said, it is true that conservatives don't tend to get dogpiled as badly as in the past.

NSG isn't exactly a safe haven for moderates though, you're always not radical enough

[Spoder]

Good lord, summer has come early.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Good lord, summer has come early.

Yeah.. im going to hate the next few months on this forum.

[Xemnarius]

While I do have to admit that the site has moved just a tad to the center in recent years, it still appears very left wing with the occasional vocal far right wingers. I usually fear posting on the more political threads an instead post on less political threads due to being somewhere between centrist to left leaning (well, I even out at the center due to some topics I'm fairly liberal on, a couple conservative and a couple moderate).

I still get a kick out of the people (usually on the left, but the few right wingers here seem to do the same thing) that lean pretty hard to one side, then call themselves centrists. Then they'll think anyone that's not as extreme as them (they don't think of themselves as extreme) as a far [left/right] winger.

It's kinda like someone from Hawaii calling California "the East" or someone from Japan calling China "the West".

[Liptan]

Good lord, summer has come early.

What post makes you say that?

[Krasny-Volny]

Not especially liberal. Just disproportionately full of whackos like myself who shouldn't be on the internet.