Il Bersagliere said:I agree. Kona and several other posters have done a great job of pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard of the language used to describe opposition. Calling SJWs delusional or feminist or ascribing the word 'cuck' or 'liberal' to someone leaning left in their viewpoints. Other posters have even gone as far as suggesting that these reactionary elements may be the result of something deeper, likely personal, in their lives. As such, the forum does serve as a prescriptive measure to counteract these occasional hiccups we have.
Game and weights and travel seem sufficient enough, but not evidently since these same problems keep coming up. One thing I have come to realize is that you cannot save Western Civilization from itself (harsh, I know), either in your own neighborhood or at-large. However, we can still continue to get the positive male-centric message out there and live our lives the best we can.
I was under the impression that Space Cowboy was actually addressing Kona's use of ad hominem, as he's the only one calling people 'women' for disagreeing with him.
Keep in mind that we're in the "Politics and War" subforum, so sometimes people will discuss politics here. If it triggers you, don't follow it.
From my experience, men like to discuss and share notes. It's how we gain new information and learn from each other. Occasionally there will be disagreements and differences of opinion, particularly on political topics. Some topics deeply affect separate groups differently, so it's reasonable to assume there will be different perspectives, and at times emotion may creep into the discussion and it will cross the line from the purely logical argument. If that's the case, then it's up to the mods to reign in the discussion.
What's more concerning to me is a recurring pattern of many people here who have a complete lack of ability to overcome their personal bias, forum identity politics, and need for acceptance among 'senior members'. This creates a willful blindness in recognizing their own double standards, and creates an environment where the forum descends into nothing more than a cesspool of meaningless identity politics and virtue signalling.
Rather than a place where men can escape thought policing and are held to objective standards, the same inherent nature of SJW thought policing exists, only the topics which are forbidden have been replaced. Either way, it's a minor difference to those of us who care about concepts like truth, the pursuit of knowledge, and mutual respect.
This forum has it's own preferred narratives it pushes, and third rail opinions it polices. Posters will virtue signal their devotion to the preferred narratives, and shame or attack those who hold "the wrong side" of a debate. In other words, disagreement with the narrative is used to justify attacking that person in order to encourage group conformity.
It's a recurring pattern:
- User posts something that questions one of the forum narratives
- "Senior" (i.e narrative friendly) user responds in a condescending, dismissive manner to police the topic. Nobody notices that the senior poster is attacking the other poster, since the one being attacked holds an opinion they disagree with.
- Despite being addressed with a complete lack of respect, user responds to condescending attack with logic, and when that fails, with sarcasm to illustrate the blatant irony
- Fanboys attack user while ignoring the initial attack from the SU. Cue virtue signalling their adherence to the narrative hoping to get approval from the SU.
- Fanboys passive aggressively AMOG the original poster by trying to re-frame their mere disagreement to the narrative as "being mad". In reality they're uncomfortable with people disagreeing with them, and wish to enforce group conformity.
- If user fails to recant and accept the groupthink when his rational argument hasn't been addressed, accuse him of being overemotional, having a meltdown, and so on.
Whether we like it or not, there is a political aspect of this forum. Many people have come here looking for a place where they're able to discuss things freely, among men, without fear of SJW style thought policing. Occasionally that discussion will venture into the political (especially on the Politics subforum), and it's normal for disagreements to pop up. When that happens, those disagreements should be held to an objective standard if we want to create a healthy environment for logical discussion.
For those who get uncomfortable or angry for people merely disagreeing with them, well, you should probably stay out of hot button topics. While most politics are a meaningless diversion, there are some issues which are worth attempting to understand when their significance extends into your legal status as a human being.
David: Jake, I've noticed that the Germans are growing increasingly hostile towards people with a Jewish identity. There's been instances of vigilante mob violence aimed at Jews, and I've heard rumors that Jewish businesses will be targeted soon. Should we be worried?
Jacob: Nah bruh, that's negative thinking. Hit the gym, bang some hos, and book a trip to Amsterdam for a few days. You'll feel much better.
If murder against someone is considered justified because they belong to the "wrong group" and happened to express an apparent interest in that group identity, I think that's something for members of that group to be very concerned over.
Predictions that this post will be re-framed as being mad.