It’s really not a good idea, because eg it assumes that all Irish people have the same heritage. Take Australia, as another example: We already have an ‘Australia day’, which seems uncontroversial at a glance, but is always contentious as it’s associated with the erosion of Aboriginal Australian culture and identity, and the ongoing trauma resulting from European colonisation of Australia. To many Australians, Australia day is better known as ‘Invasion day’.
Mainstream feminism might change regarding that issue, but it might not. In any case, it certainly won't in the near future, because as I explained, any attempt to bring attention to those issues within the feminist movement will lead to accusations of wanting to detract from "real issues", especially with movements like #MeToo being in the spotlight.
Mentioning that "solving" is subjective is reminiscent of anti-feminism concern trolls, I hope you're aware of that and aren't using it in the same way.
I have absolutely no idea what that question is supposed to mean though? If it focuses on male issues, then it's male specific. It can draw from feminist theory all it wants. You can share the same theory yet focus on addressing different issues.
Is there really just a single monolithic feminist movement though? I suppose the existence of different "strains" or "waves" of that cause shows that feminism as a term is a lot more muddied than just having a single way of going around things. Surely as more people bring attention to issues they would essentially cause their own strain of feminism to come into being, the success of which might change what the overall movement, if one can even speak of such a thing, considers proper? Would not such a new strain, if grown powerful enough, become a new mainstream feminism? If so, is it not too soon to speak of the categorical inability of feminism, in even future potential conceptions of the term, to help or "solve" men's issues?
I'm not saying the feminist movement is monolithic. I'm sure there are plenty of feminist meetups you can go to and seriously discuss those issues. When it comes to the public debate, though, it's all mixed up. Those who have actual influence are the ones who make the rounds in the media or who are supported by the state (via the ministry of equality for example), and by trying to bring up those issues into the larger feminist debate you're going to be accused by them of trying to "hijack" it.
I just don't see the point in trying to compete for attention within a movement that doesn't see our concerns as a priority compared to the rest of their agenda when we could just focus on building an additional movement that works on addressing them without having to walk on other activists' feet.
And yes, perhaps eventually once enough has been done for women feminists will start to focus on men's issues. But waiting until it's "our turn" isn't a reasonable approach.
Pedophilia is gross but if you can control yourself and you don't cause harm to kids then I honestly have no reason to be mad at you.
It's like all these Twitter people have heard headlines like "Pedophile rapes child" or "Pedophile does X horrible thing" all their life and for some reason, they assign all the "bad" shit to "pedophile" as if just being a pedophile is bad and not "raping and murdering children".
The Back Street Boys had huge potential. They had angelic voices when put together and were really talented singers, but they sang shallow, cookie cutter songs with no depth written for 13 year old girls.
No one should be able to own a gun unless explicitly given permission to for a very good occupational reason e.g. a farmer; hobbies, hunting, and interest aren't enough to justify any citizen ever owning one.
Is that really an unpopular opinion though? Because in my experience between the anti-gun Americans and the entire rest of the freakin' world, pro-gun is the unpopular opinion.
Yeah but even most anti-gun people are more reasonable than what he's suggesting
Facepunch seems to be pretty pro-gun from what I've seen.
Yeah I suppose. The people here who are anti-gun are very strong about it, though. I know Europe has extremely strict laws but still allow hunting for certain people.
Facepunch has a lot of Americans, some of them are pro-gun and some of them are anti-gun, but there are also a lot of Europeans who seem to lean anti-gun.
DC Comics should do some Earth-31 publications not featuring Batman. Iunno, but I think it'd be interesting to see everything that has led up to the ban on superheroes in The Dark Knight Returns.
I can sympathize with pedophiles to a point, because it's not like they asked to be that way. But if someone has an innate desire to fuck kids and they don't immediately check themselves into a psychiatric facility, 100% of that sympathy goes out the window.
Same thing with people who go on to commit mass shootings; I've got all the sympathy in the world for people struggling with mental illness and social alienation, but the second you decide to open fire into a crowd (or fuck a kid) rather than get professional help, you cease being a human in my eyes.
Guns shouldn't be a right. Th Second Amendment was a mistake and the idea that guns are a "God-given right" is what breeds the toxic, masturbatory gun culture we see in the US.
I dislike fizzy drinks/ soda. I find water is generally just much more refreshing and doesn't have an excessive taste of sugar.
The ability to own private property should be a defacto right. The ability to defend yourself and protect your livelihood should be a defacto right. It logically follows that firearms ownership is the resultant of those two rights. It was outlined explicitly instead of leaving it up to "hey you have these two pretty basic rights, therefore firearms ownership is kind of obvious and implied" because there were many nations at the time who were restricting citizens rights to posses arms, abusing their citizens, and the citizens had no means of recourse or resistance. There is no reason why firearms should be an outstanding exception to the pre-mentioned basic rights of man,
soda tastes disgusting if you stop drinking it
i stopped drinking it a while back and now all it tastes like is an excess of syrup and sugar, makes me feel like trash when i drink it
Strawberry milk is good. Really good. So good that if you're looking for something more refreshing it might even be better than chocolate milk. And this is coming from someone who loves chocolate milk.
The potent and wholly pervasive zeal Americans have for their firearms can really only be described as toxic and masturbatory. I think this shocking awful ad from Bushmaster is the best example of this mentality, and this ad was by no means poorly received by the crowd it was meant to target. This was basically just saying what they were all thinking.
Do you have something to back up that claim of acceptance? Because as someone who, you know, is actually part of the firearms community it was laughed at and mocked by most. I've actually discussed that advertisement before. It was a marketing flop because Bushmaster thought that (like any decent marketers) you should attempt to market to all demographics. So they tried to market to the emasculated demographic (much like the sports car industry would do) but instead they just got laughed at by firearms owners and many firearms owners still jest at people shooting Bushmaster rifles if they see one (also because their production quality dropped but that's another story). So actually it was poorly received, and it wasn't saying what people were thinking. Those who possess firearms because they think it makes them "a big strong man" will get laughed out of any setting with other gun owners around because people who get guns for those reasons are pathetic and rare. But again, you probably didn't know this because you are half a world away basing your assumptions on third hand accounts and headlines.
The idea that the evil government coming to take away your guns is so terrible a fate that you feel the need to vote for the pro-gun candidate despite their atrocious stances on everything else should be a sign that you need to reconsider your priorities.
The advertisement ran for two years. The main detractors online were what you'd expect, Huffpo, Gawker, BuzzFeed etc. Bushmaster ran an additional promotion off the back of that one due to "overwhelming response" and it's really hard to believe that the advertisement agency behind Bushmaster would be so tone-deaf as to put so much stock into this promotion if it was so allegedly laughable.
I'm willing to wager that I don't have to prove to you that the US' gun culture is pervasive and extremely powerful, and that we are just in disagreement over its negative impact on society. I'm not going to post links to all the gun stats because you already know them, so try to look at it from the perspective of an outsider. What people who live in countries like this one see, when looking at the US, is a country that, despite horrific and sustained gun violence rates, ardently cling to them and insist that nothing is wrong. The usual counter-arguments that get wheeled out smack more of excuses than justification. Knife crime in the UK (despite total homicide rate in the UK being almost a fifth of the US), suicides that apparently don't count, and "mental health" as if no other country has mental health problems do a great job of convincing people that guns aren't a problem when stories like Sandy Hook keep sprouting up and have no sign of stopping or even slowing down.
In any event, trying to change the position of a pro-gun American is a waste of time. My contention is that you think my opinion is apparently incorrect in thinking that the gun culture in the US is "toxic and masturbatory" in the face of the US glorifying firearms and the military for the last half-century, perhaps even longer.
The 2nd Amendment was one of the least controversial ones until relatively recently. But guns and abortion are the biggest wedge issues that get people voting GOP.
In 1876 the Supreme Court ruled that whites preventing freed slaves from owning guns didn't break the 2nd, and that it didn't mean a right to own guns, it meant a right from confiscation. This changed
with a 2008 ruling that overturned that philosophy and declared that the right to own arms is intrinsic to the 2nd Amendment.
The way I see guns in the US as a citizen that's grown up with them all around me is that I'd really prefer if they didn't exist/weren't a right but wont deny at this point we kinda have to manage with the hand we were dealt.
At this point no amount of legislation significantly reducing firearm saturation/ownership/production is feasible in this country. I know that sounds defeatist, but there are quite literally more guns than people in the US, and that's not even mentioning the tens of millions of people who are extremely passionate about their right to own those guns. It's a losing battle.
I find it hard to conceptually deny the idea that we would be better off without, though. As much as the firearm violence issue might be somewhat overblown (but, really, how can you say that such frequent tragedy could ever be overblown), it's still significant compared to other like countries and I'm not sure I'll ever be convinced that it wouldn't be at least somewhat less of an issue if the 2nd amendment wasn't firmly embedded in the foundations of our country.
I think the harder, but more central question to answer in the whole debate is whether or not the conceptual freedom to own firearms, practice its associated hobbies, and defend your property is worth the associated loss in life. I feel like people spend too much time muddled in statistics, framing them in partial ways which just means spinning wheels.
HumanAbyss said it best.
How significant of a group are single issue gun voters anyway? Given the demographics, I find it hard to believe that there aren't at least some slight ideological preferences that those voters hold towards the Red, even if they aren't as firmly held or concrete as their stance on the second amendment.
Has there ever been a time where you liked an opening band's music better than the main band that actually plays afterward? Just permanently me? Alright, that's cool.
I went to a Rolling Stones concert a bit ago just so I could listen to Elbow as the opening band ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Though on a less deliberate basis, there was one where Everything Everything opened for Snow Patrol, and let's just say that concert was entirely worth it if only for discovering Everything Everything
yea, newpunch actually managed to make one of the problems of old facepunch worse, ghost pages.
clearly a feature, just like auto threadlocking
what better way to discourage megathreads than to straight up break threads?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.