Recommended Posts

I've noticed that in a number of threads what is sometimes loosely called 'The Culture Wars' comes up and I've found whenever there is an item worth discussing that is linked to it, it doesn't have its own place for discussion and often ends up in the rant thread. 

Originally, the term Culture Wars referred to America and the split between conservatives and liberals about the future direction of the country. Nowadays it is sometimes used when talking about the clear split between what at one end are often referred to as SJWs and at the other the alt-right with a spectrum in-between. The disputes are often around race, gender, LGBTQ issues, political correctness, Islam, free speech, identity politics, sex, gaming etc.

I'm not really a fan of the term Culture Wars but I can't think of a better term to describe what has occurred over the last few years and what often seems to dominate so much of what we read and what we see on TV. The first I came across it was as a follower of the YouTube Atheist community when an almost exclusively left-leaning group split in the most acrimonious way initially over the safety of women at conferences. This is why I've never seen it as a traditional split between left and right. It it more a split from people initially on the left, many of whom have since drifted to the right because of it. I've commented before that I don't understand why thinking SJWs are crazy leads you to the conclusion that the government should tax you as little as possible. It is only more recently that the traditional right wing have come in and tried to ally themselves with anti-SJWs.

It might seem quite trivial but I think it is important and was a significant reason for Trump's election for instance. I saw a number of times in articles and on YouTube this idea that Trump was the ultimate antidote to SJW style politics. It was of course an act of unbelievable stupidity to think Trump was the answer to anything, but I genuinely don't think many people wrapped up in this style of politics understand just how despised it is. It also explains much of the reaction that we see to recent movements around sexual harrassment and BAME rights etc because they often fit within this wider Culture War. These movements have often not come as out of the blue as they might seem and often have roots in battles that have been raging for years. 

I personally and predictably sit somewhere in the middle but it doesn't seem like there are many of us. I intensely dislike the obsession we see with race and gender and instead of trying to see past it, it is the focus for everything. I also think they take things to their most ludicrous extremes which is why we see articles calling Paw Patrol and Thomas the Tank Engine Fascist. On the other hand, I think there are some pretty disgusting people on the alt-right who have normalised some pretty despicable behaviour and seem to revel in abusive trolling. What I think was once intended to be funny and provocative has blurred significantly. 

I've no idea where all this will end, hopefully with a return to common sense but I do not live in hope. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will start with something that was my own fault and was the initial trigger to start this thread. I was initially going to post it in the rant thread but realised I'd posted a number of times about the culture wars in there mainly with Farmduck and it probably needed its own thread.

I was watching a video by a YouTuber called Bearing where he was interviewing a woman who had tried to organise a free-speech conference but had promised things that she couldn't deliver and was trying to explain what had gone wrong. Bearing is firmly on the anti-SJW side of the CW and is not somebody I've ever really watched before finding him too crass when I've come across him elsewhere. I know he for instance advocated voting against same sex marriage in Australia, not because he didn't think it should happen but because it was being championed by SJWs and major organisations were virtue-signalling their support for the cause. 

Anyway I took a brief look at the comments and one of the top comments was about the how the woman had 'Jewed' people out of their money and been caught. I knew I wouldn't gain anything but replied with 'Jewed? FFS.'

The result was that I had a number of users having a go at me for my comment claiming things like I mustn't be Jewish because Jews would find it funny and how I was a crybaby for having a problem with it. I tried to explain (even though I knew it would be futile) that there were two essential problems with people liking the comment:

1) They didn't know the person using it was joking - he isn't a prominent YouTuber.

2) Even if he was joking, it was indistinguishable from an anti-semitic comment and as such probably had anti-semites liking it.

 

I'm not somebody who thinks that comedy should be censored just because it is offensive. One of my favourite programs is South Park and one of the running jokes is the anti-semitism of one of the main characters. However, there is a world of difference between a joke that everybody is on and plays on the ridiculousness of the situation and one that just looks like ordinary anti-semitism. 

I've included this here as it is far from out of the ordinary for one side of the CW. It is what causes much of the claims of harrassment online when the perpetrators are usually just trolling and thinking it is funny. However, I think it shows how out of touch with reality many of them are and what was once meant as funny has blurred into something else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the sake of balance (and my last post!), here is a good example of what infuriates people about SJWs. It demonstrates much of what tends to characterise their controversies. They are often completely intolerant of difference of opinion or approach, they are incredibly dramatic with their conclusions and they over exaggerate often shouting out labels such as racist and white supremacist to people that clearly aren't as well as calling for sackings. Enjoy although you might want to sit away from your computer/phone/TV for fear of breaking it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

hopefully with a return to common sense

A return implies that we were somehow ever there in the first place.

When I saw the title of the thread I thought "Oh no, not another expansion v the heartland debate!"

But even the use of the term SJW is pejorative and dismissive labelling. And whatever label we use that is just the same old way of doing things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I'm not really a fan of the term Culture Wars but I can't think of a better term to describe what has occurred over the last few years and what often seems to dominate so much of what we read and what we see on TV. The first I came across it was as a follower of the YouTube Atheist community when an almost exclusively left-leaning group split in the most acrimonious way initially over the safety of women at conferences.

 

I would dispute that. The split was over whether Atheism is a stand-alone position, which it is, or whether it should become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Intersectional Feminism. Atheism, IMO, should exist outside any other political considerations. Allowing it to be caught up in every trivial 3rd-Wave Feminist issue could only damage Atheism and add nothing. There is no Atheist position on manspreading or multiple genders. Atheism has no dogma and, by virtue of it's lack of belief in theism, it shouldn't have any dogma which it would have been forced to adopt in any takeover by Feminism.

6 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

 

It it more a split from people initially on the left, many of whom have since drifted to the right because of it. I've commented before that I don't understand why thinking SJWs are crazy leads you to the conclusion that the government should tax you as little as possible. It is only more recently that the traditional right wing have come in and tried to ally themselves with anti-SJWs.

Drifting away from SJW-ism and 3rd Wave Feminism isn't drifting to the right. Some people did drift to the right but it's not possible for any rational, evidence-based thinker to support notions like Islam, the gender wage gap, the Rape Culture Myth, the constant blurring of terms like sex, gender and sexuality, the denunciation of everybody as Nazis and the sheer hypocrisy of Black Lives Matter.

Richard Spencer is on record as saying that he sees the anti-SJW crowd as a gateway to the Alt-Right and he mentioned Sargon as one of the better channels in this regard. Back in 2016 the Daily Dot listed Sargon in the same article as Richard Spencer and Paul Joseph Watson. Groups like Media Matters have grouped the whole Manosphere into the Alt-Right.

I see it more as a rejection of some of the idiocy propagated by various "left" groups in USA.

6 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

It might seem quite trivial but I think it is important and was a significant reason for Trump's election for instance. I saw a number of times in articles and on YouTube this idea that Trump was the ultimate antidote to SJW style politics. It was of course an act of unbelievable stupidity to think Trump was the answer to anything, but I genuinely don't think many people wrapped up in this style of politics understand just how despised it is. It also explains much of the reaction that we see to recent movements around sexual harrassment and BAME rights etc because they often fit within this wider Culture War. These movements have often not come as out of the blue as they might seem and often have roots in battles that have been raging for years. 

Trump's election was a combination of so many factors that it is almost impossible to judge the role played by the Culture War. Hillary Clinton blatantly pandered to all the Identity Politics demographics and told everyone who disagreed with those movements that they were sexist, racist, homophobic, Islam-hating, transphobes. Didn't anyone tell her that a lot of the camp followers in these groups aren't old enough to vote and that most YouTube followers probably weren't going to vote anyway?

My main reaction to the sexual harassment allegations was two-fold: Firstly, aside from those men who immediately admitted it and got fired, where was the due process for the others? Harassment is such a vague term in many cases that to say it's an automatic sacking and career-destroying offence is absurd. There has to be an agreed gradation of offences and penalties. There needs to be a minimum standard of evidence not just, "I felt uncomfortable."

As for BAME or "Persons of Colour" as is de rigeur in USA right now (not to be confused with Coloured People, which was a racial slur back in the 1960s) what are these magical rights that they are denied?

 

7 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I personally and predictably sit somewhere in the middle but it doesn't seem like there are many of us. I intensely dislike the obsession we see with race and gender and instead of trying to see past it, it is the focus for everything. I also think they take things to their most ludicrous extremes which is why we see articles calling Paw Patrol and Thomas the Tank Engine Fascist. On the other hand, I think there are some pretty disgusting people on the alt-right who have normalised some pretty despicable behaviour and seem to revel in abusive trolling. What I think was once intended to be funny and provocative has blurred significantly. 

I've no idea where all this will end, hopefully with a return to common sense but I do not live in hope. 

I don't have any simple label either. For the last 20 years I have been a Greens voter but the NSW Greens have always been the remnants of old Communist Parties masquerading as Environmentalists. They've all been purged now and the  Greens have slipped so far into Identity Politics that I can't support them anymore. I'm more of a nuts-and-bolts Marxist with a Trotskyist tendency. Nearly 50 years ago I read "Wage, Labour and Capital" and the "Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State," and I haven't seen anything during that period which debunks basic Marx and Engels. Other than that I would consider myself maybe higher-level MGTOW, an Atheist, an environmentalist, a fairly strong Biological Determinist and a staunch believer in the Scientific Method.

To be fair to the Alt-Right, and I think we should acknowledge that people have the right to believe and say whatever they believe, subject to the basic laws on violence, they are so poorly understood by American commentators that nearly every attack on them is just a cavalcade of strawmen. Nothing has contributed more to my detestation of the American Left than their pathetic attacks on "the Alt-Right." They are like those people who write damning reviews of books they haven't read or movies they haven't watched. I've never seen a 3rd Wave Fem or SJW or gender-trender who could successfully graduate from Remedial Logic class without a quota.

7 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I was watching a video by a YouTuber called Bearing where he was interviewing a woman who had tried to organise a free-speech conference but had promised things that she couldn't deliver and was trying to explain what had gone wrong. Bearing is firmly on the anti-SJW side of the CW and is not somebody I've ever really watched before finding him too crass when I've come across him elsewhere. I know he for instance advocated voting against same sex marriage in Australia, not because he didn't think it should happen but because it was being championed by SJWs and major organisations were virtue-signalling their support for the cause. 

 

I don't think anyone over 15 watches Bearing for anything other than the lulz. His interview with Based Mama was probably the best performance he has ever put in and showed, as some of his live streams on serious topics have shown, that he is tailoring his content to suit his market and is capable of rising well above that level.

All the OZ YTers, the conservatives, the anti-Fems, the MRAs, even the Hans Hermann Hoppe fringe disagreed with Bearing over the gay marriage issue. I agreed with the points he made but not the conclusion. The intellectual tenor of much of the pro-gay-marriage crowd was down around the level of moderate-to-severe mental retardation.

 

7 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I've included this here as it is far from out of the ordinary for one side of the CW. It is what causes much of the claims of harrassment online when the perpetrators are usually just trolling and thinking it is funny. However, I think it shows how out of touch with reality many of them are and what was once meant as funny has blurred into something else. 

No, the really scary part of the sub-intelligent end of the YT commentariat is that they are perfectly representative of the voting public.

 

7 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

For the sake of balance (and my last post!), here is a good example of what infuriates people about SJWs. It demonstrates much of what tends to characterise their controversies. They are often completely intolerant of difference of opinion or approach, they are incredibly dramatic with their conclusions and they over exaggerate often shouting out labels such as racist and white supremacist to people that clearly aren't as well as calling for sackings. Enjoy although you might want to sit away from your computer/phone/TV for fear of breaking it.

 

And this is why the Intersectional crowd should be avoided at all costs. Their constant purity testing and purging of their own ranks would make Stalin and Beria squirm.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Oxford said:

A return implies that we were somehow ever there in the first place.

When I saw the title of the thread I thought "Oh no, not another expansion v the heartland debate!"

But even the use of the term SJW is pejorative and dismissive labelling. And whatever label we use that is just the same old way of doing things.

SJW is pejorative but then so is alt-right. I don't necessarily see this as a problem.

To use a RL example this isn't like using fervent expansionist when there is a term like expansionist that does the job but is not pejorative.

The problem is that there is no acceptable alternative to SJW that isn't also pejorative. They aren't progressives, they aren't liberals, they aren't the left for instance. The reality is that when I use SJW, everybody who knows about these issues knows pretty much what I am referring to. They are very much the extreme fringe of a social movement that has taken hold over the last few years.

Whilst alt-right was a label that a group once gave themselves it is now more often a term that is given to somebody as an insult much like SJW. 

Again I don't see this as a problem. There are terms we use that started out as insults, Tory being perhaps the most well known example. There are now people who self identify as SJWs and I think we'll continue to see this as a trend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

There are now people who self identify as SJWs and I think we'll continue to see this as a trend.

I bet they're fun at parties.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I've noticed that in a number of threads what is sometimes loosely called 'The Culture Wars' comes up and I've found whenever there is an item worth discussing that is linked to it, it doesn't have its own place for discussion and often ends up in the rant thread. 

Originally, the term Culture Wars referred to America and the split between conservatives and liberals about the future direction of the country. Nowadays it is sometimes used when talking about the clear split between what at one end are often referred to as SJWs and at the other the alt-right with a spectrum in-between. The disputes are often around race, gender, LGBTQ issues, political correctness, Islam, free speech, identity politics, sex, gaming etc.

I'm not really a fan of the term Culture Wars but I can't think of a better term to describe what has occurred over the last few years and what often seems to dominate so much of what we read and what we see on TV. The first I came across it was as a follower of the YouTube Atheist community when an almost exclusively left-leaning group split in the most acrimonious way initially over the safety of women at conferences. This is why I've never seen it as a traditional split between left and right. It it more a split from people initially on the left, many of whom have since drifted to the right because of it. I've commented before that I don't understand why thinking SJWs are crazy leads you to the conclusion that the government should tax you as little as possible. It is only more recently that the traditional right wing have come in and tried to ally themselves with anti-SJWs.

It might seem quite trivial but I think it is important and was a significant reason for Trump's election for instance. I saw a number of times in articles and on YouTube this idea that Trump was the ultimate antidote to SJW style politics. It was of course an act of unbelievable stupidity to think Trump was the answer to anything, but I genuinely don't think many people wrapped up in this style of politics understand just how despised it is. It also explains much of the reaction that we see to recent movements around sexual harrassment and BAME rights etc because they often fit within this wider Culture War. These movements have often not come as out of the blue as they might seem and often have roots in battles that have been raging for years. 

I personally and predictably sit somewhere in the middle but it doesn't seem like there are many of us. I intensely dislike the obsession we see with race and gender and instead of trying to see past it, it is the focus for everything. I also think they take things to their most ludicrous extremes which is why we see articles calling Paw Patrol and Thomas the Tank Engine Fascist. On the other hand, I think there are some pretty disgusting people on the alt-right who have normalised some pretty despicable behaviour and seem to revel in abusive trolling. What I think was once intended to be funny and provocative has blurred significantly. 

I've no idea where all this will end, hopefully with a return to common sense but I do not live in hope. 

I am glad you mention the American origin, as it often seems that American social discussions are transferred over to Britain and do not really fit.

The idea that it is extremely hard to find healthy food can be very true in the USA, but is often parroted in the UK. 

In the UK, I would accept being called anti-Semitic.  As a Catholic, I do not believe a Buddhist or a Jew in inherently ehtnically, morally, or intectually superior to me (or a Muslim) on that basis alone.  In the USA, it would be absurd to call that anti-Semitic.  In the USA, there genuinely is a problem with indigenous anti-Jewish racism and while I took Cartman's anti-Jewish racism to be absurd humour, it was actually a little more cutting.

Second wave feminism engulfed Scandinavia, impacted the UK hard and the USA less so.  To pretend the feminist issues are the same in all three nations is absurd.

There is also an extra issue in the USA that makes it very different.  The Jefferson deal did not work out, a society built on agriculture, honour and hierarchy lost out to industry, utalitariansism and meritocracy.  The cultural conflict, with two clear sides, is not an issue in the UK. 

There is also the size and common language of the USA.  Were this forum to include many posters from the UK to the Ukraine, I imagine we would be left far more shocked by each others opinions. 

I again repeat that I think Trump is overstated as a phenomenon, as I will quote myself:

On 2/12/2017 at 3:32 PM, Bob8 said:

I think it is remarkable how well he did in the nominee race.  He managed to capitalise on the clear difference and resentment between the Republican Party elite and grass roots, many of whom lost their party with the Progressive Pary.

But, he was a clear liability in the Presidential race. 
- He was against the most unpopular Democratic Presidential candidate ever.  I was in the USA at the time, and the hatred of her from young, educated women in particular is something that is hard to communicate.
- He was taking part in the election at a time when Republicans were far more popular as a party.
- He was following on from eight years of Democrat Presidency.
- The USA is not the UK, that he was against a woman probably helped further.

And, yet, he won very narrowly and lost the popular vote.  I cannot think of a Republican candidate ever that has had an easier run as the Republican nominee. 

We have had this discussion, I would be genuinely interested to know why you feel this does not refute that suggestion that he was a popular Presidential candidate.

I can understand why he is popular:

Imagine that your house is on fire and you call the fire brigade.

They tramp in, break a few things, are rude and upset your neighbours as they put out the fire that would reduce your house to ashes.

Do you regret calling the fire brigade?

The answer is no.

It is unfortunate that they were rude, it is unfortunate that they broke a few things, it is a shame that they upset your neighbours. But, they saved your house from being destroyed by the burning fire of socialism and political correctness and it your neighbours cannot see the bigger picture, they seem like a bunch of precious, whining idiots.

This only explains why any Republican candidate would win. 

He remains the least popular President at this stage of his Presidency:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

To say the media have it in for him is not good enough.  They are not responisble for him coming across as an idiot.  There are many examples of his acting without forethought and in a substandard way. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Bob8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

SJW is pejorative but then so is alt-right. I don't necessarily see this as a problem.

Quite a big difference between those two examples and any pejorative/stereotype is is easy pickings, serves a purpose that is questionable at best, and does nothing to change the situation.

 

49 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

To use a RL example this isn't like using fervent expansionist when there is a term like expansionist that does the job but is not pejorative.

Only because they'd use Pie in the Skyer for an expansionist and a cloth capper or some such other epithets, which would fit what you're describing.

53 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

Whilst alt-right was a label that a group once gave themselves it is now more often a term that is given to somebody as an insult much like SJW. 

And there's the big difference the label you give yourself that you see as complimentary can hardly be described as an insult with the same kind of power and targeting.

56 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

Again I don't see this as a problem. There are terms we use that started out as insults, Tory being perhaps the most well known example. There are now people who self identify as SJWs and I think we'll continue to see this as a trend.

They are all problematic because of the way they're used. And Tory may have started out as an insult but it's become a much more accurate one since then.

Social justice is something worth aspiring to unless you're the kind of person who couldn't care less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Oxford said:

 

Social justice is something worth aspiring to unless you're the kind of person who couldn't care less.

Indeed it is. Problems only start when people take it too far.

Here's an example - White Guy with Dreadlocks and Marley t'shirt. Reggae fan or cultural appropriation?

Edited by Vambo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Social justice is something worth aspiring to unless you're the kind of person who couldn't care less.

Translation: If you don't agree with me then you're a thoughtless c@@@  In logic this is called an ad hominem attack. It's the intellectual equivalent of, "Yeah well I f###ed your mum!"

Give us an example of a current social injustice which is being addressed by SJWs or Intersectional Feminists.

Edited by Farmduck
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Vambo said:

Indeed it is. Problems only start when people take it too far.

Here's an example - White Guy with Dreadlocks and Marley t'shirt. Reggae fan or cultural appropriation?

It is not really an issue in the UK, is it?

The example you give would be considered very naff rather than anything else.  Have you any direct experience of your life being hampered by accusations of cultural appropriation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

Translation: If you don't agree with me then you're a thoughtless c@@@  In logic this is called an ad hominem attack. It's the intellectual equivalent of, "Yeah well I f###ed your mum!"

Give us an example of a current social injustice which is being addressed by SJWs or Intersectional Feminists.

Come on, Mr Duck.

While I have criticised Oxford on several occasions, this is more an example of reading different things into the same words.  Social justice is a good thing, as justice is considered a good thing.  The discussion is on what is just.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Vambo said:

Indeed it is. Problems only start when people take it too far.

Here's an example - White Guy with Dreadlocks and Marley t'shirt. Reggae fan or cultural appropriation? I personally witnessed a guy being hassled over this.

I don't see this as anything to do with social justice. If we don't start off with the idea we can all wear whatever we like we contribute it being okay for the people who had a go at him. It's an example of prejudice but unless white guys with dreadlocks are say banned from travelling to the USA ( give Potus the Troll a few minutes to see if it'll help make America great again) or being over represented in the poorer end of society for no apparent reason would make it a social injustice question, at least that's how I understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

It is not really an issue in the UK, is it?

The example you give would be considered very naff rather than anything else.  Have you any direct experience of your life being hampered by accusations of cultural appropriation?

Yeah a naff example but an example nonetheless.  Witnessed a guy with dreads being hassled over it because he was white. 

It is where we are heading though. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I hear guys in their 50s, 60s throwing around terms like SJW, virtue signaling, etc I do tend to roll my eyes and switch off.  

They do have an absolute fit if you suggest that wearing a poppy is virtue signalling....

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

Give us an example of a current social injustice which is being addressed by SJWs or Intersectional Feminists.

Well certainly not this post FD. Have you or would you ask a racist a similar question? What I am writing about is the dismissal of important issues by downgrading people using labels to say they're worthless. We are all guilty of this as we are of being prejudiced. They are part and parcel of the same process. The culture war is a war of labels. The election was a war of labels. Our lives are a war of labels. The real winners are the people who think the labels are immutable and real. And unfortunately,  I don't have a label for them to dismiss them and everything they may or may not stand for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Vambo said:

Here's an example - White Guy with Dreadlocks and Marley t'shirt. Reggae fan or cultural appropriation?

If people but Gucci, drive Fiats and drink espresso with Panatone after a meal of pasta is that cultural appropriation or some one who likes to spend his holidays in Italy or merely an Italianophile? And does it matter which?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oxford said:

If people but Gucci, drive Fiats and drink espresso with Panatone after a meal of pasta is that cultural appropriation or some one who likes to spend his holidays in Italy or merely an Italianophile? And does it matter which?

I did say it was an example of when things are taken too far 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

When I hear guys in their 50s, 60s throwing around terms like SJW, virtue signaling, etc I do tend to roll my eyes and switch off.  

They do have an absolute fit if you suggest that wearing a poppy is virtue signalling....

 

I wish the whole thing was just some weird quirk of a small handful of American Universities. These people are already in our Parliament making legislation based on nothing more than their feelings and a desire to virtue signal to every tiny Identity Political demographic out there. Our Government is using taxpayer money to produce volumes of lies about Gender Pay Gap and Campus Rape Culture.  The Workplace Gender Equality Agency produces a report every year showing that women still get 16% less than men. BUT, they take their data from the Household Income, Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey. If you go to the source document, the HILDA data shows very clearly that men work 17% longer hours than women. This part of the data is always omitted from the WGEA report. When you consider that, under most Awards, some of the additional hours that men work should attract overtime loadings, the true result is that, on average, women are being paid about 2-3% more than men.

Because of the popularity of the Great Campus Rape Culture Myth in the USA, Australian feminists tried to import it. They organised a big study which had to include "incidents of staring or leering" and incidents while travelling to and from University (why would this be relevant? Do all these harassers, intimidaters, starers and leerers have some secret knowledge of whether a women is travelling to Uni or just to work?) just to come up with a number that looked even half shocking. And, buried under all the fluff was the glaring statistic that Australian women are twice as safe from rape on campus as they would be in the broader community.

The Victorian Govt was even having boys in primary schools stand up and promise not to be rapists. (52% of all homicide victims under 5 are killed by their mothers so naturally we need a programme where girls stand up and promise not to murder their children. No?) I wish all this ###### was just some dystopian corner of YT but it isn't. The leader of the Greens even attempted to have a talk by Milo Yiannopoulos shut down, purely to appease the loudmouths at the Feminist hive mind. Honestly, Milo Yiannopoulos is about as offensive as an episode of Family Guy.

Our taxpayer-funded ABC spews endless piles of this rubbish. A prime example was this piece of garbage:

Quote

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-17/record-sale-of-indigenous-womans-artwork-highlights-gender-gap/9161984

The record sale of an artwork by an Australian woman has drawn attention to the gap between male and female artists in the industry.

Few Australians may have heard of Emily Kngwarreye, but her painting, Earth's Creation 1, sold for $2.1 million at auction in Sydney last night.

Three obvious things wrong with this story:

- Emily Kngwarreye sold the painting 20 years ago so the she wasn't going to get anything from this sale.

- Just because a painting by a male Australian painter sold for $4.1 million that says nothing about the gender of the artist because there is no fixed price for paintings.

- It doesn't, as the article states, highlight the pay gap between male and female artists because both artists had already sold their paintings years ago so they got nothing and both artists are dead so they would have got nothing anyway. If anything it shows that their is no pay gap between female and male dead artists. Also let's not forget that the male artist Sidney Nolan sold his painting in 1946 and Emily Kngwarreye sold hers in 1995 so I'm guessing she got substantially more for hers.

Or lets not forget the hailstorm of concern from the Outrage-Industrial Complex when Sydney University offered a scholarship to study Veterinary Science, and the endowees had stated that preference would be given to a male student intending to study large-animal practice and work in a rural area. For the perfectly simple reason that farmers have trouble getting vets in country areas and men tend to stay longer than women. Also women tend to specialise in cats and dogs because they intend to work in a suburban practice, not out in the bush (where 90% of the animals live). AND current Vet Science graduates are 90% women.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

I wish the whole thing was just some weird quirk of a small handful of American Universities. These people are already in our Parliament making legislation based on nothing more than their feelings and a desire to virtue signal to every tiny Identity Political demographic out there. Our Government is using taxpayer money to produce volumes of lies about Gender Pay Gap and Campus Rape Culture.  The Workplace Gender Equality Agency produces a report every year showing that women still get 16% less than men. BUT, they take their data from the Household Income, Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey. If you go to the source document, the HILDA data shows very clearly that men work 17% longer hours than women. This part of the data is always omitted from the WGEA report. When you consider that, under most Awards, some of the additional hours that men work should attract overtime loadings, the true result is that, on average, women are being paid about 2-3% more than men.

Because of the popularity of the Great Campus Rape Culture Myth in the USA, Australian feminists tried to import it. They organised a big study which had to include "incidents of staring or leering" and incidents while travelling to and from University (why would this be relevant? Do all these harassers, intimidaters, starers and leerers have some secret knowledge of whether a women is travelling to Uni or just to work?) just to come up with a number that looked even half shocking. And, buried under all the fluff was the glaring statistic that Australian women are twice as safe from rape on campus as they would be in the broader community.

The Victorian Govt was even having boys in primary schools stand up and promise not to be rapists. (52% of all homicide victims under 5 are killed by their mothers so naturally we need a programme where girls stand up and promise not to murder their children. No?) I wish all this ###### was just some dystopian corner of YT but it isn't. The leader of the Greens even attempted to have a talk by Milo Yiannopoulos shut down, purely to appease the loudmouths at the Feminist hive mind. Honestly, Milo Yiannopoulos is about as offensive as an episode of Family Guy.

Our taxpayer-funded ABC spews endless piles of this rubbish. A prime example was this piece of garbage:

Three obvious things wrong with this story:

- Emily Kngwarreye sold the painting 20 years ago so the she wasn't going to get anything from this sale.

- Just because a painting by a male Australian painter sold for $4.1 million that says nothing about the gender of the artist because there is no fixed price for paintings.

- It doesn't, as the article states, highlight the pay gap between male and female artists because both artists had already sold their paintings years ago so they got nothing and both artists are dead so they would have got nothing anyway. If anything it shows that their is no pay gap between female and male dead artists. Also let's not forget that the male artist Sidney Nolan sold his painting in 1946 and Emily Kngwarreye sold hers in 1995 so I'm guessing she got substantially more for hers.

Or lets not forget the hailstorm of concern from the Outrage-Industrial Complex when Sydney University offered a scholarship to study Veterinary Science, and the endowees had stated that preference would be given to a male student intending to study large-animal practice and work in a rural area. For the perfectly simple reason that farmers have trouble getting vets in country areas and men tend to stay longer than women. Also women tend to specialise in cats and dogs because they intend to work in a suburban practice, not out in the bush (where 90% of the animals live). AND current Vet Science graduates are 90% women.

 

Hey you better watch it!....they might have to impose a special tax on you to rectify any future damage your ideas may/may not cause, over here we call it a carbon tax....cha ching.

And they might backdate it for you to your birth date...your a male ain't ya?...ch ching.

And you got white feathers...cha ching.

We're slowly getting there, we need the names and addresses  of your entire peer group now to put us over the top....ante up!

Signed,

University of New South Wales

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oxford said:

Well certainly not this post FD. Have you or would you ask a racist a similar question? What I am writing about is the dismissal of important issues by downgrading people using labels to say they're worthless. We are all guilty of this as we are of being prejudiced. They are part and parcel of the same process. The culture war is a war of labels. The election was a war of labels. Our lives are a war of labels. The real winners are the people who think the labels are immutable and real. And unfortunately,  I don't have a label for them to dismiss them and everything they may or may not stand for.

Have I asked a racist what? Whether his racism is addressing some social injustice? The answer would, I assume, depend on what he was doing.

I'm not dismissing any important issues. I think global wealth inequality is a massive issue but I don't think having 30 new genders will fix it. I'm not using labels to downgrade people. I'm using labels to point out the stupidity of their ideas.. As a white male, in their eyes I'm already damned. Sorry, did I say "white male?" Of course I meant "white cis-hetero male." Prejudice can't always be legislated. You cannot regulate thought. You can hate black people if you want but you can't take any measures to discriminate against them. That is as far as any legislation can go.

No, my life isn't a war of labels. "The real winners are the people who think the labels are immutable and real." Who do you mean? The SJWs who think that all white cis-het males are Nazis? Are you saying that they're the winners. I'm using the label SJW because this thread is called "The Culture Wars" and the SJWs are a widely-recognised faction in the culture wars. Just like Skeptics™, Alt-Right, Libertarians, 3rd Wave Fems, Trumpists, Nazis et al.

You still haven't given me an example of a current social injustice which is being addressed by Intersectional Feminism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Vambo said:

I did say it was an example of when things are taken too far 

Yes and I was saying how stupid it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Yes and I was saying how stupid it is.

Well you sure found a long winded way of saying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express Yearbook 2018/19 - Order Now


Rugby League World - Nov 2018

Rugby League World - Nov 2018



League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday