LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Males have the right to not be fondled by gay males. If males never fought for the right not to be fondled by females, maybe it's because it didn't matter to them.
PEOPLE have the right not to be fondled. Full stop.
Advertisement
by Katganistan » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:31 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Males have the right to not be fondled by gay males. If males never fought for the right not to be fondled by females, maybe it's because it didn't matter to them.
by Lavan Tiri » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:55 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Galloism wrote:Um, wrong direction.
The problem is that men are never taught they have any right to their own bodies at all. So "being fondled" is just something we have to deal with and grin and bear it.
The answer isn't "welp, that's the way it is. let's just roll with it." - it's to teach men as we've taught women that they DO have a right to their own bodies and to be concerned with sexually aggressive female molesters.
Males have the right to not be fondled by gay males.
If males never fought for the right not to be fondled by females, maybe it's because it didn't matter to them.
Big Jim P wrote:I like the way you think.
Constaniana wrote:Ah, so you were dropped on your head. This explains a lot.
Zarkenis Ultima wrote:Snarky bastard.
The Grey Wolf wrote:You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Renewed Imperial Germany wrote:I'm not sure whether to laugh because thIs is the best satire I've ever seen or be very very afraid because someone actually thinks all this so.... have a cookie?
John Holland wrote: John Holland
by Sovaal » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:14 pm
by Stellar Colonies » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:15 pm
Floofybit wrote:Your desired society should be one where you are submissive and controlled
Primitive Communism wrote:What bodily autonomy do men need?
Techocracy101010 wrote:If she goes on a rampage those saggy wonders are as deadly as nunchucks
Parmistan wrote:It's not ALWAYS acceptable when we do it, but it's MORE acceptable when we do it.
Theodorable wrote:Jihad will win.
Distruzio wrote:All marriage outside the Church is gay marriage.
Khardsland wrote:Terrorism in its original definition is a good thing.
I try to be objective, but I do have some biases.
North Californian.
Stellar Colonies is a loose galactic confederacy.
The Confederacy & the WA.
Add 1200 years.
by Liriena » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:17 pm
Washington Resistance Army wrote:TSA should be entirely removed tbh
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Western-Ukraine » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:30 pm
Factbooks: National Politics
Region: U R N
by Infected Mushroom » Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:41 am
Lavan Tiri wrote:Infected Mushroom wrote:
and they are only doing it to protect everyone from terrorists and criminals
its for the greater good after all
Because they're so motherfuckin' good at catching terrorists. The TSA is, by and large, not keeping Americans safe--if terrorist wanted they could stage a reenactment of 9/11 every so often and the TSA would be entirely unable to stop them. Maybe they rotate landmarks, to keep it fresh. BOOM goes the Golden Gate Bridge, BOOM goes the Saint Louis Arch, BOOM goes Tom Hanks. . .and the TSA would be unable to stop it, because they can't detect the vast majority of weapons (some plastic explosives are undetectable by their reader thingies), and the smart terrorists can take advantage of their awfulness. Don't act like the TSA is performing a valuable service--they're attempting to perform a service that private companies were already dealing with.
Also, I personally don't care about the gender of the officer frisking me--they're just doing their job, and I'm enduring it.
by Sovaal » Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:40 am
Western-Ukraine wrote:I see no issue. It could add some additional security with little cost. Male officers for men and female officers for women, that's how it goes. It's only sexual if you think of it that way.
What's with all this wanting to put down TSA because of personal likes and dislikes anyway? I want to see some actual arguments against TSA, something solid to show why it's not worth doing.
by Lavan Tiri » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:00 am
Infected Mushroom wrote:Lavan Tiri wrote:
Because they're so motherfuckin' good at catching terrorists. The TSA is, by and large, not keeping Americans safe--if terrorist wanted they could stage a reenactment of 9/11 every so often and the TSA would be entirely unable to stop them. Maybe they rotate landmarks, to keep it fresh. BOOM goes the Golden Gate Bridge, BOOM goes the Saint Louis Arch, BOOM goes Tom Hanks. . .and the TSA would be unable to stop it, because they can't detect the vast majority of weapons (some plastic explosives are undetectable by their reader thingies), and the smart terrorists can take advantage of their awfulness. Don't act like the TSA is performing a valuable service--they're attempting to perform a service that private companies were already dealing with.
Also, I personally don't care about the gender of the officer frisking me--they're just doing their job, and I'm enduring it.
The TSA is but one of many layers of security initiatives; they have a collective effect. The CIA, FBI, NSA and other agencies all run other covert measures and surveillance. We need all the security we can get.
Big Jim P wrote:I like the way you think.
Constaniana wrote:Ah, so you were dropped on your head. This explains a lot.
Zarkenis Ultima wrote:Snarky bastard.
The Grey Wolf wrote:You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Renewed Imperial Germany wrote:I'm not sure whether to laugh because thIs is the best satire I've ever seen or be very very afraid because someone actually thinks all this so.... have a cookie?
John Holland wrote: John Holland
by Kramanica » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:29 am
by Salandriagado » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:35 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Galloism wrote:Um, wrong direction.
The problem is that men are never taught they have any right to their own bodies at all. So "being fondled" is just something we have to deal with and grin and bear it.
The answer isn't "welp, that's the way it is. let's just roll with it." - it's to teach men as we've taught women that they DO have a right to their own bodies and to be concerned with sexually aggressive female molesters.
Males have the right to not be fondled by gay males. If males never fought for the right not to be fondled by females, maybe it's because it didn't matter to them.
by Salandriagado » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:37 am
by Kramanica » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:38 am
by Kramanica » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:39 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Galloism wrote:Um, wrong direction.
The problem is that men are never taught they have any right to their own bodies at all. So "being fondled" is just something we have to deal with and grin and bear it.
The answer isn't "welp, that's the way it is. let's just roll with it." - it's to teach men as we've taught women that they DO have a right to their own bodies and to be concerned with sexually aggressive female molesters.
Males have the right to not be fondled by gay males. If males never fought for the right not to be fondled by females, maybe it's because it didn't matter to them.
by Salandriagado » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:19 am
by Serrono » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:26 am
by Ethel mermania » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:36 am
by Ethel mermania » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:44 am
Serrono wrote:I think that regardless of your gender being padded down by a grumpy, half-awake TSA agent at six o'clock isn't going be too comfortable. I understand situations wherein people of the opposite gender wouldn't like to have their private parts padded down, and I think it goes for both genders. I know men who would be uncomfortable being patted down by a woman. I think TSA should at least try to respect people's preferences.
I don't mind either way. Just do it quickly and respectfully.
by Kramanica » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:17 am
by Nui-ta » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:18 pm
by Purpelia » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:14 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Females? If so, they must've been onto something, being that they did a better job convincing males to be okay with it than males did convincing females to be okay with it.
by Apalacia » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:25 am
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:12 pm
Purpelia wrote:LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Females? If so, they must've been onto something, being that they did a better job convincing males to be okay with it than males did convincing females to be okay with it.
They actually have. Just not in the same culture. There are in fact cultures where women are routinely trained to believe that if they get raped, yes not even fondled but outright raped, it's their fault, they are damaged and need to be stoned to death. I won't be dropping any names here but we all know who I am talking about.
It's all down to who your society decides decides to fuck with and how.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Katganistan » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:13 pm
Western-Ukraine wrote:I see no issue. It could add some additional security with little cost. Male officers for men and female officers for women, that's how it goes. It's only sexual if you think of it that way. What's with all this wanting to put down TSA because of personal likes and dislikes anyway? I want to see some actual arguments against TSA, something solid to show why it's not worth doing.
by Katganistan » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:15 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Big Eyed Animation, Eahland, Kubra, Rusrunia
Advertisement