This²
Advertisement
by Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:17 am
by Ifreann » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:17 am
Cannot think of a name wrote:How women dress has nothing to do with me and therefore does not require my input.
by Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:29 am
by Nazis in Space » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:29 am
by Makdon » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:33 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:However, I think the best case for the idea that it's a problem is the irrationality of those who say otherwise. They conflate all criticism of it with "rape culture," despite dress codes at public services like schools being done on behalf of the same voters who made sentencing for it generally second only to that for murder. They assume those who enforce what they signed up to enforce are only "projecting" their own supposed nature onto others, and not, you know, acknowledging that people who made it that far in university are not necessarily reflective of everybody else. They complain about assuming "without evidence" that males are horndogs who'll be distracted easily, (proven by the irrationality of those who say otherwise) but their response being to assume things about others without evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they never really objected to assumptions not based on evidence.
If you're an opponent of school dress codes, how do you justify smearing every male who ever bothered to teach as a pedophile? How do you justify claiming to value evidence and then going along with such smears anyway?
Me, I think the case for dress codes to limit distraction has been vindicated.
Now, that leaves behind one question; for what purposes is provocative attire even worn? Is the whole point to attract male attention? If not, what is it?
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:42 am
Inkopolitia wrote:Elwher wrote:For a private institution, I have no problem with the concept. You agree to go there, you agree to the rules they set; don't like them, you can always leave.
For a public school, however, as long as the existing laws against public nudity are not being violated, students should be allowed to express themselves in whatever clothing choices they make. Like everything else in life, of course, choices have consequences. If you chooses to dress provocatively, do not complain that people are looking, just like if you wear a button down shirt with a pocket protector, you will be called a nerd.
"Telling boys who look at women provocatively to not be creeps and to have a competent system that punishes creeps harshly? Pfft, no! I'll just tell women how to live their lives and call it a day!"
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 Bienenhalde » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:44 am
by Kernen » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:45 am
Bienenhalde wrote:Why can't people just quit complaining and follow the rules? Is it really that hard?
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:46 am
Makdon wrote:LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:However, I think the best case for the idea that it's a problem is the irrationality of those who say otherwise. They conflate all criticism of it with "rape culture," despite dress codes at public services like schools being done on behalf of the same voters who made sentencing for it generally second only to that for murder. They assume those who enforce what they signed up to enforce are only "projecting" their own supposed nature onto others, and not, you know, acknowledging that people who made it that far in university are not necessarily reflective of everybody else. They complain about assuming "without evidence" that males are horndogs who'll be distracted easily, (proven by the irrationality of those who say otherwise) but their response being to assume things about others without evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they never really objected to assumptions not based on evidence.
If you're an opponent of school dress codes, how do you justify smearing every male who ever bothered to teach as a pedophile? How do you justify claiming to value evidence and then going along with such smears anyway?
Me, I think the case for dress codes to limit distraction has been vindicated.
Now, that leaves behind one question; for what purposes is provocative attire even worn? Is the whole point to attract male attention? If not, what is it?
Why should women be punished for mens mistakes? There's nothing wrong with uniforms or dress codes, but it's bullshit to say we need to them to prevent women from dressing too "provocatively". You can't just say the only solution to this problems is to punish women, the victims, and then act you the other side is being crazy for saying you're wrong, just because you're a "voter who made sentencing for it generally second only to that for murder". Good job doing the right thing there, but not being a jerk doesn't mean you get blame women. Also, how in the world does disagreeing with what you said constitute "smearing every male who ever bothered to teach as a pedophile"?
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 Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:47 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Inkopolitia wrote:"Telling boys who look at women provocatively to not be creeps and to have a competent system that punishes creeps harshly? Pfft, no! I'll just tell women how to live their lives and call it a day!"
Why complain that someone looks at what you are showing off?
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:51 am
Nazis in Space wrote:So, I'm wearing a shirt with a middle finger print on it.
Some random dude comes up to me on the street, yells at me, pushes me, and eventually decides to beat me up until I require hospitalisation.
How many people would step forward and say 'Well, he was dressing provocatively, clearly he was just asking for it.'?
Yeah, I haven't heard of that kind of thing before, either.
So I'm kind of at a loss as for why the precise same scenario, just involving a short skirt instead of the middle finger shirt, and unwanted penis-in-vagina action instead of hospitalisation (though, one can certainly combine those two) does frequently involve people stepping forward and saying 'Well, she was dressing provocatively, clearly she was just asking for it'.
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 LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:52 am
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 Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:54 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Inkopolitia wrote:Wow! Maybe it's because I want to feel confident in who I am and I do not want creeps looking at me not as a human but instead as a sack of walking meat?!?!?!? I don't know!
Who gets to say what constitutes "as a human" and what constitutes "as a sack of walking meat"?
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:55 am
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 Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:00 pm
by Cannot think of a name » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:01 pm
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:03 pm
Inkopolitia wrote:t's really ludicrous that someone expects basic decency and people pull out the very douche-baggy behavior of "YOU EXPECT BASIC DECENCY AND TO BE TREATED LIKE A HUMAN BEING?! Well, according to my definition, you don't constitute MY definition of decency, so therefore I can be a creep as much as I want!"
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 LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:04 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:When dealing with people who invoke platitudes that have no real definition? Absolutely.
What are you looking for, exactly? A timer for how long you look, one second shy and you're cool, one second longer and you're a creep? A list of approved comments you can make? How much permission are you seeking to impose yourself on someone else?
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 Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:04 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Inkopolitia wrote:t's really ludicrous that someone expects basic decency and people pull out the very douche-baggy behavior of "YOU EXPECT BASIC DECENCY AND TO BE TREATED LIKE A HUMAN BEING?! Well, according to my definition, you don't constitute MY definition of decency, so therefore I can be a creep as much as I want!"
I didn't say I could be a creep. I was telling you to define the supposed distinction between looking at someone "like they were a piece of meat" and "like they were a person."
You falling back on twisting my words shows that you don't really have one.
Can't say I'm too surprised.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:05 pm
Inkopolitia wrote:LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:I didn't say I could be a creep. I was telling you to define the supposed distinction between looking at someone "like they were a piece of meat" and "like they were a person."
You falling back on twisting my words shows that you don't really have one.
Can't say I'm too surprised.
I would say what constitutes a "piece of meat" but i'd get banned for violating PG-13. You know what a human is. After all, you're at least 13 or older, right?
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 Cannot think of a name » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:11 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote:What are you looking for, exactly? A timer for how long you look, one second shy and you're cool, one second longer and you're a creep? A list of approved comments you can make? How much permission are you seeking to impose yourself on someone else?
If they invoke the supposed distinction, it's up to them to define it.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:13 pm
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 Inkopolitia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:15 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Inkopolitia wrote:I would say what constitutes a "piece of meat" but i'd get banned for violating PG-13. You know what a human is. After all, you're at least 13 or older, right?
Duh. And if I used the Internet at a younger age, it'd be my own fault anyway.
But we all have lusts, with the possible exception of the completely asexual. There will always be similarities to, and differences from, how we look at "pieces of meat." You have yet to define what sort of "look" one gives either.
Again, I'm not surprised. No one ever did before, either.
by Cannot think of a name » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:15 pm
by Necroghastia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:20 pm
Bienenhalde wrote:Why can't people just quit complaining and follow the rules? Is it really that hard?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Australian rePublic, Bovad, Dimetrodon Empire, Ifreann, Shrillland
Advertisement