#MeToo Hysteria Is A Pretext For Women To Take Power And Money Away From Men - Page 74 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14980727
@Drlee Excellent post. I concur 100%.

I, for one, could not find anything offensive or even annoying, with the ad.

You can, of course, be like this guy.
Image


:lol: The responses to this are hilarious, to say the least. :lol:
#14980780
Rancid wrote:Cool (referring to @Drlee's & @Pants-of-dog's posts)


I agree they made some good points, but they also believe we should use media propaganda to shame and ostracize people into agreeing with the current politically correct view. This isn’t how democracy is suppose to work. We pass laws and enforce them on individuals who violate them.
This transition to ‘government by propaganda’ is accepted by initially using things that are easy to agree with, but this leads to what You mentioned. There is no longer any need for discussion. You either accept the new message and insult everyone who doesn’t or you become ostracized. This type of thinking makes any message presented the correct one by default.
#14980784
One Degree wrote:
I agree they made some good points, but they also believe we should use media propaganda to shame and ostracize people into agreeing with the current politically correct view. This isn’t how democracy is suppose to work. We pass laws and enforce them on individuals who violate them.
This transition to ‘government by propaganda’ is accepted by initially using things that are easy to agree with, but this leads to what You mentioned. There is no longer any need for discussion. You either accept the new message and insult everyone who doesn’t or you become ostracized. This type of thinking makes any message presented the correct one by default.


Yes, also good points here.


My comments below are much more general and go beyond this particular subject:
I would say the following:
No one is ever really 100% right, or 100% wrong. Yet, this is the mode of operation people have gotten themselves into. They seem to always think they are 100% and everyone else is 100% wrong. It gets worse when people get into their teams because the team re-enforces this way of thinking.

This is why I cringe when people come off strong and seem unwilling to at a minimum acknowledge that there is some validity to the other sides opinion. This is of course, regardless of whatever the hell is being discussed/argued. One way to win points with your opponent is to actually acknowledge that they may have a point, or that their point may be at last in part valid. People don't seem to understand this. 100% denying someone as completely wrong/stupid/whatever is an easy way to never come to any significant conclusion/agreement.
#14980829
I agree they made some good points, but they also believe we should use media propaganda to shame and ostracize people into agreeing with the current politically correct view.


So you believe we should not shame and ostracize bullies and sexual predators because the notion of both is just political correctness? I disagree. It is exactly what we ought to do.

This isn’t how democracy is suppose to work. We pass laws and enforce them on individuals who violate them.


No no no. All social interaction need not be a matter for law. Moral teaching exists outside of law. For example. It is fine for Mormons to teach that homosexuality is a sin. It is not OK for them to try to make it illegal. It is also OK for me to take to the court of public opinion to oppose their view. It is not OK for me to take to law and try to ban Mormons.

It is when personal opinion harms others that both solutions are applied. We shame and ostracize people who would grab a woman's pussy and we make it against the law. Unless you are a republican. Then you elevate the pussy grabber to the highest office in the land and allow him to appoint people like him to high public office.

This transition to ‘government by propaganda’ is accepted by initially using things that are easy to agree with, but this leads to what You mentioned. There is no longer any need for discussion. You either accept the new message and insult everyone who doesn’t or you become ostracized. This type of thinking makes any message presented the correct one by default.


What do you think all political speech is? It is the speaking of truth if you agree and propaganda if you do not. When you win an election, you have the means to codify some of your views.

Churchill said, "The difference between a politician and a statesman is that a statesman agrees with you".

Times change old man. When you and I were young, certain treatment of women was common and socially acceptable. That did not make it right anymore than blackface was right. Woman and others have asserted themselves and demanded certain unacceptable treatment stop. I find it curious that people who call this stuff "political correctness" and advocate for its suppression would personally kick the living shit out of someone who did one of these things to their wife or daughter. I am more surprised when they act like pussies and elect abusers to public office.
#14980833
Shaming is a powerful tool. it's an interesting question though. When is shaming acceptable? Is shaming a good tool?

For example, is fat shaming ok given how horrible being overweight is for your health? Or is it not ok because it could create mental pain/depression/etc.? Does shame in general create mental pain/depression/etc.? Would shaming asshole woman haters cause them to become more damaged and actually work against your goals?

Yes I know, I'm full of questions and have no answers. We have two ears and one mouth. We should be doing more listening than talking. :) That's wisdom I got from an ex-con.
#14980835
Godstud wrote:I don't watch TYT because they're too biased. Sorry, but that doesn't have anything to do with the Gillette ad.


Yes it does.... She's the "prominant activist" they choose to highlight in close up in the commercial at 0:40.

So yes it does....

SHE WAS MOST LIKELY PAYED FOR HER PROMINENT APPEARANCE IN THE COMMERCIAL.

Gillette could have picked any less controversial Feminist #MeToo celebrity willing to do it....

They choose Ana fucken Kasparian.... The woman who happens to deny the Armenian Genocide and frankly who's mouth is regularly spewing swearwords and insulting remarks far worse than any of those depicted in the commercial being said by those male actors.
#14980851
skinster wrote:https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157012559418343&set=a.211814973342&type=3&theater


I pray for her. I live only about 30 minutes drive away and I've been there at night. At night that place can be very very empty and very dark(not many streetlights near that UNI, and less cameras too, the parking lot in particular is fucken huge). But that's got nothing to do with the commercial or general Men in Melbourne society. It's got everything to do with the fact that no matter how "confident" you are, a person, male or female, should never come home alone in Melbourne at night, EVER. Either take an Uber/Taxi straight home, use your own car, get a lift or come home together. As an international Uni student unfortunately I'm sure her options were sadly limited, but yeah someone should have taken her back home.

Melbourne is dangerous generally at that time of night on your own wether or not you're a guy or girl(although yes male assailants usually for both, and obviously Men are more likely to get bashed and robbed rather than raped). Melbourne has low population density and some places are safe during the day but highly dangerous at night. Bundoora is famous for being very very quiet at night(despite only being roughly 30km from the CBD).

I'm 6ft tall and a 16 year old girl tried to rob me and threatened to stab me with a carving knife in what was technically my own home(family Milk Bar). I was once given a genuine death threat just for staring at a guy acting suspicious around the donation box right in the middle of a CBD Catholic Church in broad daylight. Had to sneak out, call the cops and avoid the psycho "polite enough to be" waiting to attack me at the front entrance.

Can't tell you how many times I've been followed by weirdos at night and had to lose them, despite being 6ft 4in. He probably noticed she was on her own followed her off the tram then struck at a quiet place.
#14980863
Drlee wrote:So you believe we should not shame and ostracize bullies and sexual predators because the notion of both is just political correctness? I disagree. It is exactly what we ought to do.



No no no. All social interaction need not be a matter for law. Moral teaching exists outside of law. For example. It is fine for Mormons to teach that homosexuality is a sin. It is not OK for them to try to make it illegal. It is also OK for me to take to the court of public opinion to oppose their view. It is not OK for me to take to law and try to ban Mormons.

It is when personal opinion harms others that both solutions are applied. We shame and ostracize people who would grab a woman's pussy and we make it against the law. Unless you are a republican. Then you elevate the pussy grabber to the highest office in the land and allow him to appoint people like him to high public office.



What do you think all political speech is? It is the speaking of truth if you agree and propaganda if you do not. When you win an election, you have the means to codify some of your views.

Churchill said, "The difference between a politician and a statesman is that a statesman agrees with you".

Times change old man. When you and I were young, certain treatment of women was common and socially acceptable. That did not make it right anymore than blackface was right. Woman and others have asserted themselves and demanded certain unacceptable treatment stop. I find it curious that people who call this stuff "political correctness" and advocate for its suppression would personally kick the living shit out of someone who did one of these things to their wife or daughter. I am more surprised when they act like pussies and elect abusers to public office.


There are two flaws in your reasoning. First you assume your opinions are the correct ones to be used in shaming people into conforming. Second, you are justifying shaming a group for individual actions, such as when it is directed at ‘men’ and ‘Republicans’.
The purpose of laws are to reflect the community morality. Any other morality is simply an opinion that should be expressed, but not viewed as accepted fact. When you shame a group or a view, you are bypassing our legally accepted means of stating our agreed upon morality and placing your view above it. This is why it is so harmful to refer to ‘groups’. We should only be concerned with individual behavior.
#14980875
The purpose of laws are to reflect the community morality. Any other morality is simply an opinion that should be expressed, but not viewed as accepted fact. When you shame a group or a view, you are bypassing our legally accepted means of stating our agreed upon morality and placing your view above it. This is why it is so harmful to refer to ‘groups’. We should only be concerned with individual behavior.



You can write this as many times as you like but it is still wrong. In fact it does not even make sense.
#14980877
Drlee wrote:You can write this as many times as you like but it is still wrong. In fact it does not even make sense.


Perhaps you could be bothered to explain why? If our laws don’t reflect our common morality, what does?
#14980889
colliric wrote:
I pray for her. I live only about 30 minutes drive away and I've been there at night. At night that place can be very very empty and very dark(not many streetlights near that UNI, and less cameras too, the parking lot in particular is fucken huge). But that's got nothing to do with the commercial or general Men in Melbourne society. It's got everything to do with the fact that no matter how "confident" you are, a person, male or female, should never come home alone in Melbourne at night, EVER. Either take an Uber/Taxi straight home, use your own car, get a lift or come home together. As an international Uni student unfortunately I'm sure her options were sadly limited, but yeah someone should have taken her back home.

Melbourne is dangerous generally at that time of night on your own wether or not you're a guy or girl(although yes male assailants usually for both, and obviously Men are more likely to get bashed and robbed rather than raped). Melbourne has low population density and some places are safe during the day but highly dangerous at night. Bundoora is famous for being very very quiet at night(despite only being roughly 30km from the CBD).

I'm 6ft tall and a 16 year old girl tried to rob me and threatened to stab me with a carving knife in what was technically my own home(family Milk Bar). I was once given a genuine death threat just for staring at a guy acting suspicious around the donation box right in the middle of a CBD Catholic Church in broad daylight. Had to sneak out, call the cops and avoid the psycho "polite enough to be" waiting to attack me at the front entrance.

Can't tell you how many times I've been followed by weirdos at night and had to lose them, despite being 6ft 4in. He probably noticed she was on her own followed her off the tram then struck at a quiet place.


In the US in 2010, over 77% of homicide victims were men. Is it similar in Australia?
#14980895
I'll be interested to see how this advert goes down in South Africa, Saudi Arabia and New Guinnee.

Oh what you not showing it there. Oh sorry you don't care about women being raped, beaten, assaulted and killed when its done by non White cultures and Muslims. Oh I see this is typical Cultural Marxist attack on White culture.

As men we have a moral duty to protect women and children as Tommy Robinson has done. I've bought Gillette products for years. Well not any more!
#14980902
One Degree wrote:Perhaps you could be bothered to explain why? If our laws don’t reflect our common morality, what does?

Laws don't define morality. They are there to prevent serious wrongs to people by giving the wrongdoer a punishment if they're caught. Morality is far wider than the area covered by laws; it covers honourable conduct, good ways to treat your family, friends and fellow humans, and more.
#14980905
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Laws don't define morality. They are there to prevent serious wrongs to people by giving the wrongdoer a punishment if they're caught. Morality is far wider than the area covered by laws; it covers honourable conduct, good ways to treat your family, friends and fellow humans, and more.


I did not say laws define morality. I said laws reflect common morality. The things you mentioned are individuals opinions on morality. They are not ‘common morality’ unless you can tell me what basis of commonality they have that our society accepts. Your examples are reflected in our laws anyway.
You are also mistaken that our laws only address ‘serious wrongs’. They specifically state they apply to different levels of wrong such as ‘misdemeanor’ and ‘felony’.
#14980909
@One Degree , you said "when you shame a group or a view, you are bypassing our legally accepted means of stating our agreed upon morality and placing your view above it.". That's what you get wrong. Laws are not to "state" morality; they are to draw limits on what is permissible by defining punishments. We can express our opinions without "placing our view above" the law. And remember, the ad is shaming a view, not a group.

They only address serious wrongs because they don't cover, say, breaking your promise to do your household chores. Or, in most places, things like cheating on your spouse. Yes, it is commonly agreed those are things you shouldn't do.
#14980913
Rich wrote:Oh sorry you don't care about women being raped, beaten, assaulted and killed when its done by non White cultures and Muslims. Oh I see this is typical Cultural Marxist attack on White culture.
:lol: It's an AD. They cater it to an audience they want to sell their product to. Your statements are ignorant and really didn't involve any thought processes, did they? :knife:

Don't buy Gillette, then. Who cares? :roll:
  • 1
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 91
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@JohnRawls No. Your perception of it is not. I g[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I'd be totally happy for us to send ground troop i[…]

Any of you going to buy the Trump bible he's promo[…]

There were formidable defense lines in the Donbas[…]