- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
“OWWW! MY OWN FOOT THAT I SHOT!!!”
I never thought leopards would shoot MY foot!
the same gay people who would tell the cops stonewall is right up the street
I can understand people disagreeing with them, but kicking sand and attacking people is literally the actions of fascist too. You don’t win people over by attacking them.
deleted by creator
So do you have a link or somewhere I can learn more about your domestic terrorist organization?
deleted by creator
So you keep this information stored on your local computer? Isn’t it dangerous?
deleted by creator
Who am I jerking off here?
The rest of the conversation is missing, but you seem to be looking for volunteers to be jerked off by you?
Reminds me of a piece that is gone – but the below rephrase comes from here: https://mstdn.social/@ZhiZhu/109502665651546617
"The Paradox of Tolerance disappears if you look at tolerance, not as a moral standard, but as a social contract.
If someone does not abide by the contract, then they are not covered by it.
In other words: The intolerant are not following the rules of the social contract of mutual tolerance.
Since they have broken the terms of the contract, they are no longer covered by the contract, and their intolerance should NOT be tolerated."
I like that. That’s a helpfully consistent way of framing it.
deleted by creator
That sounds like the right answer, but really, I’d be right there kicking sand.
You don’t prevent your bar from becoming a nazi bar by asking nicely though.
So what’s the plan then? You going to punch the other side in the face to win their votes and show them how anti-fascist you are?
Maybe if fascists got their faces punched in more often they’d understand that getting punched in the face sucks and that maybe they shouldn’t advocate for punching people in the face in the first place.
Was Biden voting against same-sex marriages and gay people serving in the military a fascist once? Will Democrats call Biden a recovered fascist?
You once were a child, making poor decisions. Are you still that way? (waves at the rest of the crowd to hold their comments) No? Would you look at that then, it’s like people are capable of growing and learning.
So, you fuck that bullshit narrative here and now, past and future actions don’t mean shit. People change for better or worse, and you don’t sit on your ass and point fingers because past or promises, but by current actions, things occurring here and now.
And right the fuck now there’s only one realistic option for the LGBT+ community in the states, so I don’t particularly give a damn what the fuck happened decades ago. If you’re still stuck in the past, might want to reflect on that. The rest of us have bigger shit to worry about.
it’s like people are capable of growing and learning.
except biden didn’t learn or grow; he has a long history of going with the status quo and the status quo currently says that gays are okay and if gays were not okay tomorrow with the status quo; biden would tow that line as well.
and i wish i had your privilege of ignoring the recent past; we’ve learned from it because it was so painful and we’re still trying to recover.
If you’re worried about LGBTQ+ community then you’d be advocating for Biden to step down.
deleted by creator
You make it clear they’re not welcome in the community, by force if necessary, and you let them back in once they’ve shown they can be trusted to be a member of the community again. IF they show they’ve changed.
I’ve been on a committee of people making this decision more than once. Rarely do people change enough to be welcomed back. Community self policing is the only way to really protect yourself when the government shows they wont.
Where do they go? Do you propose that America has red states where only conservatives should live & blue states where liberals can live? Do you want to put over half of voters in concentration camps?
Oh no, the slipperiest of slopes attached to nothing but pure conjecture! I will never be hungry again with all of the words you just put into my mouth!
removed by mod
Their point was that kicking someone out of a small club isn’t the same as kicking them out of the state.
Your exaggeration of their point is what made it bad, not the point itself. That’s what the slippery slope fallacy is.
They saw no point in debating your exaggerated question because it was so different to their position.
They showed that they understood your debating technique better than you showed.
deleted by creator
So 30% support fascism according to you, but come elections over 40% are expected to vote for Trump. Who are the other 10%? Are the people voting for RFK Jr. fascist? Would that mean over 50% of Americans are fascist? Do you expect 39% to win in a war against over 50%?
deleted by creator
You don’t, but at this point if they haven’t chosen the correct side it’s kind of on them.
So you attack them & tell them it is their fault that you’re attacking them? Kind of like how an abuser would blame the abused?
Your analogy assumes innocence. In fact, it’s so strained that I have to believe you’re operating in bad faith here, or made a lapse in judgement.
It assumes that you’re the instigator of physical violence.
“When Trump won, my husband was so upset he wanted me out of our apartment. The rage was unexplainable — I mean honest rage. I could not understand this emotion in him and why anyone would let a political vote destroy or nearly destroy a marriage,” he said.
if you vote for someone who’d like to make your marriage illegal, it’s gonna strain the marriage duuude
Also politics displays values. I don’t want to date a republican for myriad reasons like valuing low taxes over strong social services or opposing environmental regulation. Caring for those struggling and for the environment are firm moral positions of mine and I would be angry to find my wife disagrees with those.
I’ve had a lot of people pull the “It’s just politics, why are you so mad?” card, especially after Trump won. Just shows this is all a game to them, that they do not give a shit about the consequences of their actions.
Most of the ones who did it to me were straight white people though, so they were insulated by their privilege. It takes a whole other level of delusion to play that game when you’re one of the minorities these assholes target.
Most of the ones who did it to me were straight white people though, so they were insulated by their privilege. It takes a whole other level of delusion to play that game when you’re one of the minorities these assholes target.
insulated by their privilege is the right phrase; i was fucked over multiple times by biden et al’s banning of gays from marriage & federal service and student loans, but if you mention it now you get labeled as a tankie or russian/chinese shill; only the younger gays and the people who biden et al. hasn’t fucked over get to enjoy this privilege while people in my situation have to forget or white knuckle it.
Agreed. A lot of those views seem to have genuinely softened as he aged (after all, he actively championed gay marriage during the Obama admin), but still, there is a lot of unsavory shit from his time as a senator, and it does take a lot of effort to reconcile that.
A lot of those views seem to have genuinely softened as he aged (after all, he actively championed gay marriage during the Obama admin)
he also actively campaigned on appeasing segregationists in his much more recent campaign until kamala had to embarrass him publicly in a debate; so no, those views haven’t softened as evidenced by both biden’s decades long track record and a painful recent schooling by kamala; among other examples from the recent past.
also, “unsavory” is putting it extremely mildly when people were put in prison; homes permanently broken; and livelihoods were destroyed by biden et al’s actions.
Reminds me of my sister-in-law’s husband, who fell heavily into Brexit propaganda. Ranting about foreigners coming over, to his wife’s face. She was from Iceland.
They’re divorced now, oddly enough.
It’s just the none white foreigners he was mad about, dude should have clarified his position…
It’s just the none white foreigners he was mad about, dude should have clarified his position…
I dunno, Brexiters seemed to have a lot of trouble with the Polish.
Don’t forget them “Romanian” Gypsies!
It’s a crying shame really, because if they’d sat down and spoke to a Romanian, they’d find that hatred of gypsies is one of the few things they’ve got in common.
I dunno, Brexiters seemed to have a lot of trouble with the Polish.
there have been many examples and treatises of how the whiteness was/is non-uniform in the united states; is the same true in england?
“White” has a very flexible definition depending on the racism du jour. In the US, plenty of Europeans, like Irish, Spanish, and Italian people weren’t considered “white” for a long time.
But now we’ve got plenty of brown and black people to be even more racist against, so they get to be “white” these days.
Well of course. Race is a social construct, how we define races depends entirely on the society and its prejudices.
Option 1: Use coded language that directly attacks your spouse.
Option 2: Openly admit to being a hardcore racist.Sucks to suck.
“but I just don’t understand that” -that dumbass
Womp womp, thinking about all the women who divorced their husbands because they voted for a pussy grabber. Fuck around and find out.
It takes two people to let a vote ruin a marriage. If you know your spouse has strong feelings about politics but it’s just a game to you, then just maybe you shouldn’t play the game in a way that will make your spouse hate you.
Apparently, Jews for Hitler are also having some trouble. They’re commiserating with the black members of the KKK and the Association of Marxist-Leninist Landlords.
I would never suck a MAGA dick. Enjoy being lonely while your cult worships the orange fascist!
MAGA isn’t a cult. Cults are small. MAGA is big enough to be a religion, which is far more dangerous.
Cults are completely different from religion and size is not a defining factor. They’re more similar to a con and will sometimes use religion to exert control.
Knitting Cult Lady is great! She has a video outlining 7 defining characteristics of cults but I can’t find it.
That’s a myth perpetuated by Christian mums during the satanic panic. Back in the 60s the hippie movement was in full swing and young people were abandoning Christianity to follow pagan religions like Wicca and Hellenism. Christian pastors felt threatened, so they came up with a conspiracy to take the word cult (which up until then had meant a small religion) and make it a bad word by association with abuse. That’s why all the historical examples of cults that predate the 60s have no association with abuse. You take an example like the Cult of Dionysus and there’s no pejorative meaning to the word.
I don’t think it’s a myth if it has become an area of study. Yes, words have different meanings like “theory” does in and out of academia, but the current understanding of the word is much more comprehensive than a small religion. And MAGA is most definitely a cult of personality that uses religion as a tool.
You can do science on any made up word and reach genuine conclusions with flawed premises. Look at phrenology and scientific racism. If you ignore the question “is this thing real?” and skip straight to “what are the associations with this thing”, you’ll find something. It’ll be nonsense, but it’ll be there.
For example, suppose I look at the habits of clowns and roofers. I don’t question why clowns and roofers are associated, I just assume they are and check the data. The data I find will be the overlay of two different trends. I’ll reach all sorts of conclusions about clowns that are only true of roofers, and vice versa. The data will say clowns love a good beer after being outdoors all day, and roofers visit party stores a lot. That’s nonsense, but if I don’t question the association, the data will show it.
Associating small religions with abusive religions is the same mistake. The data will tell you all sorts of things about small and abusive religions, but it won’t tell you which trend belongs to which group, and people will make all sorts of wrong assumptions based on the wacky data.
Yep, science has churned out some whacky stuff before. But what? So you’re saying that the study of non-religious or coincidentally religious cults as a means to exploit and control is pure made-up nonsense? That’s kind of wild to me considering how characteristic and consistent their modus operandi is. MAGA fits the bill so well, for example, that I have a hard time believing they don’t exist. And I’d like to hear some opinions from people in the know, like Daniella Mestyanek from the link above, who you’re essentially saying her entire field of study is based on a lie.
Well, no. When you’re talking about the kind of massive institutional power of the kind that buys politicians and institutes theocratic dictatorships, that kind of power is exclusive to larger religions. You won’t see that kind of thing from a cult. Now a cult may well have beliefs just as vile as a religion, and it may ruin lives, but it doesn’t have the institutional power it takes to crush all opposition like you see from MAGA and Christianity.
The church of scientology.
Also not a cult.
Look into it. But not too hard or too publicly.
Were you paying attention earlier in the thread when I said cults are small, or are you expecting me to investigate Scientology and find that surprise, they’re actually very small and don’t have many members?
MEGA cult. Not to be confused with MAGA cult.
You telling me that the “religion” that sued the Cult Awareness Network into oblivion so they wouldn’t be labeled a cult is not a cult?
The Cult Awareness Network presented itself as a source of information about “cults”; by 1991 it was monitoring over 200 groups that it referred to as “mind-control cults”. It also promoted a form of coercive intervention by self-styled “deprogrammers” who would, for a significant fee, forcibly detain or even abduct the cult member and subject them to a barrage of attacks on their beliefs, supposedly in order to counter the effects of the brainwashing. The practice, which could involve criminal actions such as kidnapping and false imprisonment, generated controversy, and Ted Patrick and others faced both civil and criminal proceedings.
Gee, I fucking wonder why they lost that lawsuit. Scientologists are evil, but so was the Cult Awareness Network. You’re not going to convince anyone that those assholes were doing the right thing. You can’t expect a bunch of kidnappers to have a good opinion about what is and isn’t a cult. Scientology is a large scale religion, which makes it much worse than a cult. Now I don’t want to hear you defending the Scientologists by calling them a cult again.
Cult is just a word the big congregation uses about the small congregation
The new lexicon is “High demand group”
This encompasses cults, religions, MLMs, and all sorts of other groups that behave cult-like attributes
You’re right. Even the moonies had big politicians kissing up to them once they got big enough and no one blinked, despite their leader openly claiming he was above Jesus Christ of Nazareth on the heavenly totem poll.
We’re dealing with a very strange religion.
Anti-theist here, religion in all it’s forms is a blight on humanity, but let’s not muddle the waters with misused vocabulary.
The difference between a cult and a religion is not the number of believers, it’s how much they enforce groupthink, how hard it is to leave and if they are based around a charismatic leader who profits directly from the imposed sameness and thought control. Generally cults:
- Rush you into joining and discourage or disallow questions.
- Followers are encouraged to worship a specific group leader.
- Leaders dictate in great detail all aspects of followers’ lives.
- Followers are personally monitored to ensure they’re following guidelines.
- Methods of control are used to keep members close.
That’s how, for example the catholic church isn’t a cult but scientology is. The sharp surveilance and strong measures in place to prevent deviancy make all the difference. It’s easy to leave catholicism, but leaving scientology can even be dangerous.
That’s a measure of the abusiveness of a religion and has nothing to do with its size. I already explained in depth in another comment the political motivations for creating a second, fake definition of the word cult. If you consult Merriam Webster you’ll see the first definition of the word cult is “a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious”, and none of the definitions mention abuse, because your claim is ahistorical myth.
Same thing. Cults are never small.
I had a friend who is gay and supported Mitt Romney back in the day. He campaigned against gays. Obama won and legalized same-sex marriage. She is now married to her wife. Reminds me of her
obama didn’t legalize same sex marriage; the supreme court did
Granted, you’re technically right. Support for it was certainly a large part of Obama’s campaign though. It’s unclear what the overall result would have been for Obergfell vs Hodges with an administration that would have been vitriolic to the ruling.
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage.
– barrack obama 2008 during his campaign.
Voted against DOMA and eventually repealed it. There were some weird semantics about naming nomenclature of calling it a marriage in the early 2000’s. During the primaries he gave vague answers about some religions being opposed to it but did flip from earlier statements about same-sex marriages in his earlier career
Voted against DOMA and eventually repealed it.
doma was voted and enacted in 1996.
obama entered federal politics in 2008.
the supreme court invalidated doma in 2015.
doma was repealed in 2022
You’re right and I’m misremembering how it happened. I really thought DOMA was later. I’m not sure the distinction between invalidating in verse repealing it. He may have seemed more pro-LGBTQ since others were more outwardly against it.
I’m not sure the distinction between invalidating in verse repealing it.
in practical terms:
- the repeal had no impact and was done by a congressional act that gave anti-lgbtq bigots legal protections for their bigotry; it was little more than political theater to make democrats seem more progressive on an issue that they chose wrongly (and cover biden’s ass) in 1996.
- the invalidation meant that i could sponsor my life partner for citizenship, but he had already been deported years prior and he was (barely) young enough to know that he had enough time to rebuild his life with someone else and did so; while i was too old and autistic to make getting back on that horse a reality.
He may have seemed more pro-LGBTQ since others were more outwardly against it.
i suspect there’s a blind spot when it comes to democratic voters and lgbt issues; it’s assumed they’re more gay friendly unless you’re bitten by their anti-gay policies.
It’s not that these people are necessarily dumb it’s a kink like any other. They want to keep the thrill of getting off on doing something illegal and socially unacceptable (in the fascist society they support)
“When Trump won, my husband was so upset he wanted me out of our apartment. The rage was unexplainable — I mean honest rage. I could not understand this emotion in him and why anyone would let a political vote destroy or nearly destroy a marriage,” he said.
Could not understand why anyone would let a political vote destroy a marriage. A political vote for a party that wants to destroy that marriage might do it.
Also reminds me of the “the missing missing reasons” thing. Where one person is like “it’s unexplainable. i have no idea why they’re so upset” but when you probe a little, you learn that they did explain.
Very interesting and very sad read.
“I don’t understand the emotion”
Exactly like my dad on this. It’s really simple, he likes Trump’s crudeness, cruelty, insulting, and offensive behavior, and getting a rise of people for supporting him or repeating his most blatantly vile statements. It’s juvenile fun to play around with.
He knows he’s eating shit to make other people smell his breath. Everything past that is a justification slapped together. Ultimately nothing matters to them past the sport politics sophmoric bullshit.
does something specifically because it hurts other people
“why don’t they like me?”
Why are people like this
He believes that hierarchy is the correct way of the world. So he thinks it’s his right and duty to keep people “in their place”. That’s why (in his mind) giving shit to people below him is ok.
Notice how these people never give shit to people “above them”, even though trump and others treat them like shit. He accepts shit from people above him and doesn’t understand why people below him don’t accept it from him.
That’s actually a pretty interesting lens to use for analyzing these people’s behavior
It’s not a “lens”. It’s what conservativism is. This is the only commandment: protect the hierarchy and stay in your place.
Conservativism comes from monarchy, which comes from warlords. All the reasons and ideas are just layers on top, justifications for the hierarchy to exist.
In D&D, this is termed “lawful evil”.
This is an explanation of being a bully
Yeah pretty much. Trump isn’t even the worst person I’ve seen a lot of GOP friends and family get enthralled with, he’s up there with Rush Limbauh, Micheal Savage, Dr Laura, Anne Culter, these people have been openly white supremacist and racist fascists since the 90s or later. And they all come up with taking points that are often cruel, petty, childish insults. Conservatives eat it up. It’s all great fun for them.
I wonder how many of our current problem boomers are a direct result of leaded gasoline.
Probably quite a bit. When a reduction in leaded gasoline directly correlated with a fall in violent crime, it was confirmation. We know how long lead lasts in the body, and all that lead in the atmosphere didn’t just disappear. We know there is no safe amount of lead exposure.
Maybe they should stop supporting him.
You don’t have to be smart to be gay
Reminds me of Uncle Ruckus.
Wait til you see what happens in another 7 months
GOOD!
“Gay man who put face inside the leopard cage is sad that his face keeps getting eaten”
