What's the best anti-SJW literature?

>>5903706

lol what a virgin.

Adorno

>>5903706
Friedrich Nietzsche - The Gay Science
Judith Butler - Gender Trouble
Franz Fanon - Black Skin, White Masks

>>5903708
I know you are but what am I?

>reading something to justify his preconceptions
I hope this holidays bring new interests that don't depend on what other people are doing.

>>5903716
I'll bet you never do that, and I'll bet you're not just complaining because it's something you disagree with

>>5903716
fuck you faggot

Mein Kampf

>>5903732
Finally a serious response. Thanks for actually contributing to the thread, Anon, unlike some people who just want to turn this board to shit.

Tao Lin

>>5903735

you forgot the :^)

>>5903720
I try to complain whenever someone openly acts stupidly, I'm sure it's something most people here do.
And if you really want to know, no, I try to diversify my reading. It's healthy and I'm sure anyone who reads more than one or two books monthly does the same. Eventually your well of preconceived ideas run out and you're forced to face that people took time to develop quite interesting shit completely unrelated to your petty rivalries.

>>5903723
Happy festivus to you too.

>>5903750
>And if you really want to know, no, I try to diversify my reading. It's healthy and I'm sure anyone who reads more than one or two books monthly does the same. Eventually your well of preconceived ideas run out and you're forced to face that people took time to develop quite interesting shit completely unrelated to your petty rivalries.
Wow good thing this has nothing to do with the thread and OP is just looking for literature on a specific topic that he or she is interested in right now

Tao "The Autist" Lin

srsly guise read my stuff

>>5903745
I wasn't being sarcastic, but I'm not autistic enough to use sarcasm markers like the meme smiley anyway

toasting in epic bread

try Ann Coulter, op

File: maximator on rights.png (35KB, 857x431px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 857x431px

>>5903706
Stirner.

He's actually pretty popular amongst certain types of disenfranchised people, but not because he argued that "group X should have these rights too!". He deconstructed this rights faggotry in itself, thereby on the one hand emancipating all kinds of freaks and on the other hand making a mockery of liberalist rhetoric about a right to freedom and preciousness. His approach is sort of a "might makes right", but in a pleasant and refreshing way.

Anything that properly fights against Cultural Marxism

>>5903775
From what I just read I don't see how that's against SJWs, it kind of encourages them to keep doing their stuff.

>>5903822
Of course. The best "anti-X" is simply to ignore X.

Lending any amount of time, words, or treatment to something helps it gain traction. Ignoring it lets it slip into oblivion.

4chan seems to understand this least of all, lending so much attention to tripfags and other unwanted nonsense...

>>5903716
>interests that don't depend on what other people are doing.

but being-with-others is literally all existence is

>>5903779
What is Cultural Marxism?

>>5903775
lol Stirner is even more SJW than SJW, he's the worst and most radical leftist of all time, everyone is a fucking special snowflake, fuck society, it's all about individual expression, fuck the oppression lol

>>5903845
Modernism.

File: equality.jpg (117KB, 751x923px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 751x923px

Anything Nietzsche

>>5903756
Kek, this.

The irony of that tripfag is that he's promoting free thought and healthy discourse, but his obvious intent is just to draw skepticism to a viewpoint which he disagrees with.

>>5903867
Friedrich "women belong in the kitchen" Nietzche

>>5903884

>implying 95% of them have any business outside the kitchen

>>5903895

>2014
>reading Ayn Rant

pls no

File: lou-salome_16904[1].jpg (114KB, 447x666px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 447x666px

>>5903884
Friedrich "Men pull the cart for women under a whip of flowers" Nietzsche

>>5903706
> reading anti-something literature instead of pro-something
> hating instead of trying to understand

>>5903845

The same as social liberalism. I think some people did not like that social and economic liberalism were linked so they tried to hide the relationship by adopting the new term "cultural Marxism".

I think they were afraid to be discovered to be followers of the same degenerate trend themselves, despite themselves being keen to call others "degenerates".

And the traditionalists and fascists are making a disservice to themselves by using this term because they are basically aiding the liberals in this respect.

/pol/ pls go to bed

>>5903863
> Everyone is a fucking special snowflake
Nope. Only I am.
> it's all about individual expression
It's all about -my- expression.
> fuck the oppression
I care not to be oppressed. I care not of the rest, though.

>>5903927
Yes, this is the ultimate point. It's all about you, fuck society, Stirner takes that to its logical conclusion and writes a book arguing for everyone to do that. He's modernism incarnate in its rawest form.

>>5903932
And that is not what SJWs are doing. They are spouting their humanist narrative about people being accepted as themselves by society and whatnot, and how they have universal rights and all that. Stirner doesn't care. To him, all verification comes from Ego, never from society. To protest for the rights of Gays is just a spook, unless it has a direct relationship to something pragmatic i.e legislation that would make your life more self-employable.

SJWs would dislike his perfidious selfishness as the ramblings of a dead white man who financed his philosophy with his wife's funds. Are they far off from the true Stirner? Who knows.

>cannot stop thinking about topics in terms of "X versus Y"
>reads literature as a way to arm himself in future internet debates
>suspiciously adopts any argument which aligns with his prejudices since he is incapable of reasoning out his own criticisms

So why do you dislike "SJWs", anyway? What are *your* reasons?

>>5903952
>What are *your* reasons?
My penis is tiny what are *your* reasossd

>>5903948
Yes, SJW's aren't as radical as Stirner, they still have faint traces of pre-modern collective concern. Stirner is pure modernism.

>>5903822
>>5903863
He's anti-SJW because he thinks social justice and any form of justice are bullshit concepts, as displayed in the quote I posted.

File: The_wandering_who_texte_2.jpg (12KB, 180x278px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 180x278px

Gilad Atzmon is the redpill /lit/ needs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hWl8jq4zLI#t=5990

File: 1317546307694.jpg (93KB, 650x533px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 650x533px

>>5903904
>being this pleb

>>5903971
"Social Justice" is just a leftover shell. It's not about justice for society, it's about shitting all over society and telling them the dysfunctional snowflakes come first.

>>5903984
> it's about shitting all over society
Do you have peer-reviewed sociology articles to prove this claim?
> the dysfunctional snowflakes
Surely if they were dysfunctional, they would not be able to sufficiently change the system and there would be no need for hate or opposition for them?

File: 41Qov0MMOlL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (14KB, 241x346px)

14KB, 241x346px

>>5903706

File: multiculturalism_politics_guilt.jpg (35KB, 400x592px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 400x592px

>>5903991

>>5903990
>Do you have peer-reviewed sociology articles to prove this claim?
That SJW's care more about marginalized groups than the majority?

>Surely if they were dysfunctional, they would not be able to sufficiently change the system and there would be no need for hate or opposition for them?
The snowflakes are dysfunctional, their advocates aren't necessarily.

>>5903711
this. Even though /pol/tards think Adorno is some sjw-lord, he actually debunks the hypocracy of the modern narcissisticaly motivated "movements"

But I think OP is looking for some kind of /pol/tier shit, that provides him with völkisch and social darwinistic progaganda.

>>5904002
hypocrisy*

QUICK DEMOGRAPHIC CHECK

IF YOURE NOT REPLYING TO THIS POST BY ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS, YOUR POST IS UTTERLY IRRELEVANT IN EVERY MEANS AND YOU SHALL BE REGARDED AS THE KING OF ALL THOSE WHO ARE RETARDED.

1) Who here considered themselves a social justice warrior, or advocate for social justice?

2) Who here has a tumblr account?

3) Who here is female?

Bonus question:
4) Who here is Jewish?

Answer each question with an "I do"/"I don't", or any variation of those statements.

>>5903995
>That SJW's care more about marginalized groups than the majority?
No, that they're "shitting all over society".

> The snowflakes are dysfunctional, their advocates aren't necessarily.
That's a rather abstract way of putting it. Who are, explicitly, these snowflakes, why do they dysfunction and who are their functional advocates then?

>>5904009
gb2/pol/

I know you're sad that moot ruined pol for you but please, you don't have to ruin the 5chons for everybody else

Why do you guys care about sjw's so much, its not like they are affecting your life in any way. Just stop talking about them and you will find that its no big deal.

>>5904009
1) I do in a Deleuzian manner (i.e anything less than full acceptance is worse)
2) I don't.
3) I'm not.
4) White Catholic.

>>5904025
>ad hom
Didn't expect anything better from a woman.

Are you afraid to answer those questions?

>>5904009
1) Social justice is fundamentally an egalitarian concept and I do not have egalitarian morality

2) nope

3) male

4) Orthodox

>>5903984
That's decidedly un-Stirnerist.

File: keef sutherland.jpg (116KB, 612x612px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 612x612px

>>5904009
nah nah nah nah

>>5904027
no meaningful dissent of working class (or what now became lower consumer class in service society) can be established until we havent dealt with these fuckers.

"Women," by Charles Bukowski.

>>5904060
You're stupid as hell dogg.

>>5904074
nobody represents you, dogg

File: kek.jpg (56KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1280x720px

>>5903952

OP here.

My original interest was in academic critiques of this modern SJW phenomenon.

I am left of center and some of my main concerns with the SJW types are the following:

1. They are anti freedom of expression. They promote censorship of anything that personally "offends" them. They are politically correct and attempt to censor what anyone can say, often on the pretenses of being "offended" or attempting to label something racist or sexist to cast a stigma on it, etc. Rarely will they ascribe to the (better) idea of open debate and survival of the fittest ideas, or allowing others to express themselves even if you vehemently disagree with them.

2. SJW's attempt to dictate what is right and wrong based on what race, gender, ability, or the social class someone is rather than having a universal even standard, which leads to them to using double standards everywhere (reverse racism, etc)

3. Their attempts to blame anyone but themselves for their problems in 2014 America. Whoever has it better off in society is to blame. This includes trying to transfer guilt of all things to whites and straight people.

4. Cultural appropriation, and the SJW's racist attempts to say that certain cultures own certain ideas. Or that people of certain races/cultures are not allowed to do x, y, or z.

5. I think what it may come down to is that SJW's are more authoritarian left, whereas I am more libertarian left.

SJW's want to control speech instead of making it free, they want equal outcomes rather than equal opportunities, they try to prioritize safety over freedom, and in their attempts to change inequality they over-correct and prescribe racism and sexism.

I wanted literature on the topic because perhaps other writers have covered this topic before but in a way that is more elegant, thorough, and well thought out. And perhaps those writers could introduce nuance into my thought. I've read plenty of SJW literature and I'm not impressed, but rarely have I seen anti-SJW lit.

>>5904060
>no meaningful dissent is possible without stamping out people who dissent with me

>>5904120
Those people are mainly a Tumblr phenomenon, the academic world wouldn't waste time critiquing them any more than they'd waste time critiquing Stormfront and /pol/

Foucault

>>5904122
>every dissent is special
>every dissent is good

File: thats fucking crazy man.jpg (4KB, 219x138px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 219x138px

>>5904136

Houellebecq
Schopenhauer

>>5904123
Except they aren't. They're found in university classrooms, and many surreal fucking views are considered mainstream by them.

I think there actually are many critiques of them. Houellebecq for example.

>>5904143
And Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, etc.

>>5904120
Have you questioned your own use of "SJW" and how it seems to lump incredibly different types of people under a single "they" which you can then shadowbox against without fear of a response?

"SJW" isn't actually a formalized group of people who hold formal values. It's a catch-all. Therefore, when criticizing them, you have to be sure to avoid generalizing them. Nuance and particularity are very important. Many people might argue that they don't want censorship, they are simply voicing their opinions and companies respond by firing someone or putting out a statement due to negative publicity.

The idea of "a universal even standard" might be met with the criticism that certain groups of people are marginalized systemically and until that marginalization is accounted for and more balanced out, a universal standard would only keep people in their current classes.

>>5904151
lel, controlled opposition that did more for growth of SJW than any other single component.
the honeypots are everywhere mang

>>5903779
Too fat for the army or too autistic?

>>5904160
It's not as if Houellebecq is any more advanced. He's basically them as a French novelist.

>>5904164
He's certainly better than them.

It's not literature. The academy is toxic, remember? The ability to write shit down inevitably leads to the technology of affluence that makes people choose genders and roles for themselves that aren't purely survivalist.
The only answer to SJWs is to return to the jungle and become an ape once again.

>>5904038
le epic trole

>>5904169
Lol

>>5904165
No, he really isn't. His prose is as mediocre as anything I've read, and his critique is every bit as vapid as theirs.

>>5904156

This.

>>5904156
SJW attempt to shut down discourse by going after individuals. This is based upon their preconceived notions of equality.

There is no institutionalised discrimination in free market democracies. The SJW want to introduce control through institutions.

File: 1419427533456.jpg (58KB, 498x375px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 498x375px

it is more of the tone of SJW that is the problem. The tone was exactly the same as the Moral Majority for america a couple decades ago. Both groups thought "if I point out the problem, I am the solution". So they complain vaguely about things they don't like, then act as if they are saviours.

You can tell this started to peak when they started to rebut any criticism with a claim they were being "tone policed". So not only could you not tell them their causes were dumb, but even the way they said their ideas.

(I'm a communist btw, idk if that matters)

Peter Sotos

>>5904230
also go back to Marx for anti-sjw

>>5904030
>deleuzian manner
You know nothing of deleuze

>>5904177
You're an inauthentic dullard.

>>5903863
Why don't you like read something before you dare spout your stupid uninformed opinion and make a clown of yourself?

>>5904143
The SJW/feminist attempt to control academia is incredibly dangerous. They use their institutional "success" to control thought and speech. Even the old style communist academics seem less inclined to do this.

>>5904280
I agree. But I'm ok with it since it pisses off a lot of people I hate.

>>5904169
alright rousseau

>>5904123
They are not a Tumblr phenomenon. They are a social phenomenon that manifests on various social networks on the internet, and is distributed internationally in a number of institutions... like politics/government, law, advocacy, and education.

I've had professors that seriously & uncritically handed down 'SJW' ideology, terminology, and descriptions of the world as factual/truthful (eg. preaching feminism in a Critical Theory course, not in the specific weeks for feminism - and all of the other Theory was treated with detachment and the idea that these were 'notional', experimental ways of thinking and reading texts/culture). One of my professors used terms like patriarchy & mansplaining to explicitly encourage the majority female class to believe that they were 'under the thumb' of a patriarchal culture... without even defining these terms or making a clear argument for their real world existence - pretty much just making a political call to arms rather than a coherent description of culture. The same professor actually showed Feminist Frequency videos at the height of the Gamergate drama. From what I've seen and heard, I can't really conclude anything else but that there is a powerful current of academic social engineering and ideological priming/advertising occurring. Whether or not you agree with or believe in or are sympathetic to the thinking of this particular brand of feminism is besides the point, really. The point that should be absolutely, unequivocally clear is that this kind of thing is happening in colleges and universities all over the western world, and that it is important, influential, and dominant.

>>5904177
>his prose
Have you read him in French? Do you even speak any language besides English?
As for you second point, you're just retarded

>>5903756
lol as if this is just a specific topic he's interested in, he's not reading about sjw he's reading stuff so he can parrot arguments so he doesnt have to feel like a racist pig when he goes to bed at night

>>5904299
So you're ok with academia getting fucked over so you can have your little moment of "haha u mad bro".

Definitely female...

>>5904451
i did 4 years of sociology and never encountered an SJW student or instructor. Feminism was always kept to the weeks it was covered. We only ever would consider a few articles of what a certain feminist would say, or what how feminst thought is on inequality. Just like we did with Marxism in its month, and Weberian in its and so forth.

I did find a few SJWs in the social work program though. Little do they realize they're studying how to control poor people so jokes on them.

>>5904120
>center left
>reverse racism
>boils all arguments down to safety/equality v freedom
LOL crawl back to whatever illiterate cave u were born in

>>5904451
if i were you (if you are male) i would make an official complaint that the prof was sexist and shamed your gender, regardless of the result it could make him a lot of troubles

>>5904488

>4 years of sociology
>never encountered a SJW

Honestly, you're probably one yourself. If you weren't, you're an economist.

>>5904123
>thousands of people marching in every US city
>Tumblr phenomenon
>mfw

>>5904451
>in critical theory
>expect not to read Judith Butler or any feminists
lol go back to your stem you dumb fuck

>>5904493

i was just scrolling the front page, saw this post, and wow lmao you are fucking d e l u s i o n a l i s t i c a l

>>5904230
The problem w sjws is that they're liberals, concerned with feelings and identity politics not the class conflict. They are excellent at identifying instances of oppression but awful at coming up with solutions because their addiction to Foucault has disabled them from thinking outside neoliberal categories.

>>5904503
have you tried? colleges usually care of their students' complaints

>>5904508
no college would tell a proff to change his curriculum because he was teaching feminism. academia is run by feminists (for better or for worse [for better])

>>5904488
I envy you. I've got a BFA in Creative Writing and an Associates in Cognitive Sciences and this shit was constant from roughly 30% of faculty.

>>5904500
2/10 obviously didn't read what i wrote

>>5904512
we are talking about a guy who taught feminism in a critical theory curse etc

also you can claim the term
>mansplaining
to be offensive

would one like a term 'blacksplaining' if we speak of nigs?

all of this is reportable

>>5904519
if you think anyone in academia would take seriously (and seriously enough to infringe upon the academic freedom of a presumably tenured professor) an equivalence between 'mansplaining' and 'blacksplaining' you are kidding yourself.

>>5904523

if your college won't show at least some care to a complaint like that it's a very shitty one

you can write an article to a local newspaper then with critics of your college administration

>>5904120
u fuckin dumb liberal. time for the ~anarchist~ 2 talk.


when academics use the word "racist" they usually refer to contributing to racist institutions. not just saying mean things about because they look diffy. the autocracy of americas and western yurope is white supremacist AF. so a black fella can't can't be a "racist" (in the terms of academic vernacular).

I swear 2 god I like fascists better than liberals. because fascists atleast acknowledge and embrace their hierarchical shit

>>5904534
>racist institutions
like what?
lol

>>5904540
the racist police manifests itself in all institutions dumbo

there is a reason inner-schools are so shitty. plutocrats profit from it. uneducated kids grow up to be slaves in the prison, either that or shitty fathers and mothers. remember, boy-o, the govt doesn't allow anything to happen (on a domestic level) that it doesn't want.

blaming teachers and cops as individuals is dumb AF. but systems are create with a specific purpose. and the majority of institutions in murrica are 2 serve the upper-class fatso-s


“We are in the society of the teacher-judge, the doctor-judge, the educator-judge, the social worker-judge[...]” (Foucault, 304)

>>5904540
Prison beds are built and distributed according to where there are the largest number of illiterate fifth-grades. Of course these areas are disproportionately black (and poor, of course - the real root). Either poor, black people are an intrinsically inferior race (which you'd need scientific evidence to prove, which there simply isn't any of), or these statistics are due to social institutions (wealth discrepancies).


Now it's up to you to decide whether the government sucks at doing its job (sucks at creating equity), or really good at it (oppression).

>>5904582
I'm sure someone will be alone to discuss the transracial adoption study and post SAT vs Income demographic charts shortly.

>>5904481
>So you're ok with academia getting fucked over so you can have your little moment of "haha u mad bro".
Leftists already think academic discourse is totally controlled by bourgeoisie, so I don't see why they'd care.

>>5904567
why do you write like that? Can you stop?

i dont get how its possible to be poor in usa and blame it on circumstances

everybody can get a credit and then get education if they dont do it its their fault not anybody's else

>>5904593
yeah. academia is already a functionary of capitalism and just an ideological state apparatus, I don't care if the SJWs get their turn to make a sillier dumber capitalism full of transpride CEOs ordering around their workers. Nothing of much value will be lost

>>5904009
>1) Who here considered themselves a social justice warrior, or advocate for social justice?
I don't.

>2) Who here has a tumblr account?
I do, but just for poetry (of the non-political sort).

>3) Who here is female?
*rapid genital check* I don't.

>4) Who here is Jewish?
I do.

>>5904567
>either that or shitty fathers and mothers.

this is the one. if black kids in poor urban areas behaved well even the most poorly funded public schools could run just fine.

conservatives like to ignore broader social explanations but liberals often like to ignore personal explanations which are actually very important. many liberals seem to have the idea that minorities are being actively held back by something. not really. there are a lot of social problems that would take more than individual action to fix but the situation of say black people in america would be improved by like 80% if they just *acted better* with no involvement from anyone else.

that isnt a reasonable prescriptive solution but it's a fact and part of the equation that liberals ignore at great detriment to their credibility and ideological consistency.

>>5904611
mfw a black girl in a sociology lecture on child abuse said that white parents are too gentle with their kids and kids needed to be smacked, cause it is so much better in africa the way black kids treat parents with respect.

makes it pretty hard to care about the group when i continuously hear and read about black parents beating their kids in 2014.

>>5903920
This

>>5904609
Wow you're acting like you don't use tumblr much but just look at you go

>>5904588
spook


that can easily be explained by a few factors. black people (regardless of socio-economic) are disproportionately superscribed the load of behavior issues rather than emotional issues. this makes perfect sense considering we have a fuckin depression and anxiety conundrum in highschools in america. a student with emotional issues is given treatment whereas a behavioral disordered student will merely be punished. an overwhelming majority of prisoners were diagnosed with behavioral disorders in school (not to mention are illiterate). additionally there's cultural determinism (which is too long to get into) too

>>5904625
No, I don't use Tumblr much, I just posted several poems months ago and that's it.

Never went back to my own page, and almost never read other people's pages.

4chan is already wasting my life, I don't need another site!

Why not try to understand the issues before getting offended over them?

I think if most of /lit/ researched radical feminism (simone de beauvoir type, not tumblr's warped insanity) they would agree with most of it. It's very eye-opening. When did /lit/ become anti-intellectual?

>>5904621
kids are animals and should be treated respectively, even the bible suggests it

>Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.

>>5904611
>that isnt a reasonable prescriptive solution but it's a fact and part of the equation that liberals ignore at great detriment to their credibility and ideological consistency.

yeah, i agree. it's far fetched to expect some autonmous, african-american cultural revolution to establish a stronger family based framework. it would just be easier to abolish class (an autonmous social revolution, lol). then there would be no areas of minorities who are purposely given shit education

>>5904567
The Police are not racist.You are a pure SJW moron.

>>5904629
at this point im agnostic about racial iq differences. pro and con have reasonable arguments and i think there's a lot of noise that makes it harder to make sense of the data as you might think at first.

but this argument sure doesn't convince me. i mean if you look at those income vs. race iq scores. a black kid with 199,999 yearly income will score WORSE than a white kid with under 20,000 income. i mean you could follow those kids through their day to day lives and see that the black kid with 200k family income has an advantage in every single way, better home life, better educated parents, more opportunities in everything ... but somehow when they sit down to take a test invisible institutional oppression tumbles upon the black kid all at once? i dunno.

>>5904645
police as individuals are not. also you provide no explanation, your claim holds no weight. simply calling me a social justice warrior proves nothing

>>5904631
>Why not try to understand the issues before getting offended over them?
Because these "issues" are based on perverse sophisms that corrupt public speech (the media, politics, universities, etc.) quite widely.

>When did /lit/ become anti-intellectual?
The left doesn't have a monopoly on intelligence.

>>5904631
>Feminism
>Intellectual

Intellectuals have historically aimed at understanding ideas. Feminist academics on the other hand aim to bring about social change.

>>5904646
yes it is invisible. when he sits down he gets nervous cause he knows he is representing his race and his stats will be scrutinized and this anxiety leads to a lower score.

but obviously a rich black kids has tenfold the privilege of a poor white kid.

>>5904662
myopic a.f.

>implying de beauvoir, foucault, butler, and engles weren't intellectuals

>>5904652
You described the police as a racist institution. The nature of the police force is enforcing the law, all people have equality before the law.

>>5904652
So then where does the racism spring from?

>>5904662

>Feminist academics on the other hand aim to bring about social change.

theory =/= praxis

>>5904646
it's not just the tests, it's the grades throughout school too. emotional disorders affect a lot if not treated, dude

>>5904662
no, students aim to understand ideas. feminist intellectuals propose ideas as to why sex and gender determine things about peoples' lives

>>5904670
>Implying any of them had an intelligent thought in their life.

>>5904657
My experience with feminism has been that it is based very little on "arguments" and more so on observations. It involves removing your feelings from your observations, which is difficult for an oppressive group to do.
Observing society (at least here in America) with an unbiased eye reveals pretty quickly many truths about feminism. I manage a pool in the summer and I'm always shocked at the difference between toddlers boys' and girls' swimsuits. It's a simple observation but it's extremely telling of gender socialization in America. It's not an "argument", it's something you'd have to be blind to deny.

>>5904567
>minorities have a shit time of it
>
>therfore the institutions that are responsible
You see that empty space? That why your argument looks like shit. You can't just make huge jumps like that and then call other people dumb.

>fatsos
You mean the minorities? Rich Americans (mainly whites and asians) tend to be skinnier.

>>5904685
>he just realized the two sexes have different swimsuits
ayy sexism lmao

>>5904684
why do you even bother saying something like that? I don't understand.

>>5904686
yeah that poster writes like a retard and gives their side a bad name. please don't try to describe social science without studying it, it is just very cringyworthy and helps no one.

>>5904681
>>5904678
We understand why sex determines things about peoples' lives. That is explained by biology and to a lesser extent, psychology, feminists contribute nothing.

>>5904690
That's how observations work, ya

The differences have reason and effect.

>>5904685
Feminists find the concept of reasoning threatening because their ideas are based upon feelings rather than empirical evidence.

>>5904693
>Sexism is right because biology!!

Ugh, please don't be one of those people.

>>5904701
Did you ever consider that tendencies don't necessarily equal oppreshunz?

>>5904704
>ugh
ugh pls dont be one of those people

>>5904685
Don't play the neutral card, once again you're talking like the assumptions behind these "observations" are shared by everyone, or should be shared by everyone.

>How is "gender socialization" bad?
>How is inequality bad?
>What is an oppressive group exactly?
>What is good?

File: 050614-STPP-Graphic.jpg (549KB, 912x1824px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 912x1824px

>>5904686
do you seriously need me to explain how institutions affect people? I didn't think I would need to. In honesty, the Reagan area is mostly responsible for this. The drug war, destruction of public education and of labor unions. These all contribute to the mass incarceration of Black Americans.

>>5904703
I'm sorry? I gave you a pretty clear example of an observation that proves feminism's cause. With a critical eye a million more come into view. To deny them seems clouded by bias. The group speaking about their own experience provides anecdotal evidence

>>5904686

here, allow me to fill in the blank for you, since you are either too unwilling or too ignorant to do it yourself.

>minorities have a shit time of it
>in what ways?
>decades of racist housing policy (see: redlining, stacking)
>police policies that target blacks and latinos at a disproportionately higher rate than anyone else, despite the fact that, for example, only 2% of blacks commit violence crimes
>traumas, legacies, and residual effects of slavery, and Jim Crow laws manifest in ways too numerous to count
>therefore those institutions (housing, police, lawmaking, criminal justice) are responsible

>>5904662
do you even marx

>>5904704
There are objective differences to the sexes. This is a fact.

>>5904710
>black students are expelled more
>therfore it's the institutions

>black students are expelled more
>therefore, blacks are an inferior race

>black students are expelled more
>therefore, the black community has some cultural problems

All three of these have equal evidence from what you've provided me with.

>>5904685
>my experience with feminism
>feminism is bad because it is based on experience
are you being serious or is this a shitty joke?

>>5904685
>I manage a pool in the summer and I'm always shocked at the difference between toddlers boys' and girls' swimsuits. It's a simple observation but it's extremely telling of gender socialization in America.

you are retard if you don't understand why female nudity has a stronger taboo than male one

men and women are different biochemically. female nudity is a significantly stronger stimulant for males than male nudity for females, therefore it shouldn't be treated equally.please don't remind that 'my body my rules' crap, imagine a guy who would walk and whisper lewd things to girls on the street, he doesn't touch them, it's his voice, his body, his rules and still you (and society) would find that behavior inappropriate and a sexual aggression, female nudity is basically the same kind of sexual aggression against men

feminists who ignore biology are fucking retarded and they dare to claim that they 'remove feelings from observations' and are objective

>>5904713
Prove those things are effecting them. And prove the extent.

I have no obligation to believe any of it until then.

File: allahwilling.jpg (124KB, 448x299px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 448x299px

>>5904156

sjws r ppl who ascribe 2 the philosophy of intersectionalism

bada bing bada boom solved the "wtf do u call an SJW" problem right quick m8

>>5904718
yeah. like males are sometimes more aggressive. or the penis and vagina. but we both got hair on our legs

>>5904693
>thinks psychology is an important field
>posting in /lit/
>2014
>mfw

>>5904708
They are shared by everyone. There is no one who could feasibly argue that boys' and girls' swimsuits aren't different; with the boys being significantly less sexualized.
>What is good

Maybe feminism, then; is women saying "this is NOT good. The reality is not beneficial or just". If the group it occurs to revolts against it, why defend it? I feel you'd have to be benefitting pretty extremely from the current state of affairs to deny a change to a group that begs for it. Do you benefit from the sexualization of toddlers, anon?

>>5904718
>there are some physical differences between the sexes
>therefore feminism is irrelevant
Ugh, please don't be one of these people.

>>5904728
>sexualization of toddlers
Never even considered todlers as sexual, not even when I've seen them naked. Stop projecting your bad conscious onto everybody else.

>>5904713
This is not a logical argument. You have essentially said african americans have had bad things happen to them so the institutions of government whose job it is to look after them are responsible for these bad things.

File: godtac.png (37KB, 331x224px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 331x224px

>>5904725

to add to this critical race narratology (which is the germinating seed from which the parasite of intersectonalism emerged) began this fucked up cavalcade of making up shit 4 black ppl 2 rally behind that will only address the symptomatic outcomes of whats actually fuccin them over n not the thing thats actually fuccin them over natch

u can look @ ppl who monetize "feminism" n "race relation" type shit n find that more than not they're intersectionalists b/c its the best label under which 2 filch money from reel fuccin fools of broken n lost ppl (rachel maddox, anita w/e the jew, etc. types bein the foremost promulgators of this form of "commerce")

>>5904727
this is some sup bar b8 m80

>>5904729
Go back and read what I was responding to, stop trying to strawman.

>>5904724

yeah how about you go look up redlining, or Jim Crow, or the history of the terry stop yourself. i'd have to sit you down and hold your hand with an illustrated picture book to make you understand.

fuck, how people are so ignorant is astounding. decades and decades of research and statistical evidence is not enough for them. decades and decades of first-hand accounts is not enough. you really really just don't want to believe that racism exists. you're a coward.

>>5904736
My eyes hurt, stop posting pls

>>5904723
Oh my god. Please be trolling.

>Female skin is as bad as men following and harassing women

>Female nudity is "aggression against men"
Your statements prove the need for feminism. I don't think I could have asked for a better example.
Also, we were discussing kids <5. If you truly find their nudity "aggressive", the world would be a far better place without you and it would benefit society if you died tonight.

>>5904730
Never even considered the same gender as sexual, not even when I've seen them naked. Stop projecting your bad conscious onto everybody else.

>>5904728
OHHHH SOMEONE DOESN'T SHARE MY LEFTY CORE TENETS, LET'S IMPLY HE'S A PEDOPHILE TO WIN THIS DEBATE

0/10

>How is inequality bad?
>How is inequality bad?
>How is inequality bad?
>How is inequality bad?
>How is inequality bad?

>>5904739
>Jim Crow
Ended a long time ago. It's your job to prove its ghost still haunts the black race in America.
>decades of research hurr evidence
There's a fine line between various interpretations of any given piece of data.
>you're a coward
ayy lmao

>>5904723
Other men in this thread; read this and tell me feminism is unjustified.

File: chenergy.gif (12KB, 209x193px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 209x193px

>>5904740

chill bruh its anime cat day in ching chong wing wong land n autism doesn't take off on holidays %^DDDDD

>>5904747
>read one person's post and tell me a series of social reforms aren't justified
Supreme gentleman detected

>>5904739
The statistics do not show that african americans are being opressed by racist institutions. They have benefited from government support, then they blame the government for not making their lives perfect.

/lit/ - Tumblr

>>5904745
Trace discussion back friend, topic was toddlers' swimsuits.

>>5904746
if you don't think blacks are disadvantaged in america because theyre black idk what the fuck to tell you.

>>5904752
His view is shared by many, many men; I hope to god not the majority but it often seems that way.

>>5904758
They are not disadvantaged because they are black, they are disadvantaged because they are poor.

>>5904755
Topic is: making "observations" about male-female inequality in various domains of life, including toddlers' swimsuits.

So, my question is:

>How is inequality bad?
>How is inequality bad?
>How is inequality bad?

>>5904763
if you dont think poor white people dont enjoy some benefits over poor black people idk what to tell you

(although i agree sjw probably overemphasize race and gender)

File: rancorrancoon.png (86KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x500px

>>5904747

damn 1 dumb ass fuckface goes back 2 social darwinism n u presume im gonna hop on the "black n white guilty af anthropology academics that knowingly tilt statistical evidence towards viewpoints they support" train n ride off into ur BBC pozzed sunset pined nigga dick dynasty ya demisexually striated freaka...nasty

sage for not fucking video games b/c /lit/ might as well consider itself the cyoa h-game version of /v/

>>5904742

>Oh my god. Please be trolling

that's what i should address you

it's not clear what you meant exactly about children, i supposed that the girls have significantly more closed swimsuits since the very early age, all pedo allusions are on your conscience

and you didn't make a single logical argument why you dislike my post, of both of us i'm the only one who made some logical arguments...

overall you are a typical simpleton

>>5904730
I'm not saying you have!!
I shouldn't need to write this out-- someone must, because the female swimsuits are way more sexualized than the males. The parents choose it, but why? It's a question worth thinking about without losing your shit.

>>5904758
>if you don't agree with me idk what to tell you
I'm honestly open to your point of view. I've had this exact conversation a million times both with friends and on le 4chinz and every time it ends like this. "It's just common sense bro, don't be mean. Don't be uncool."

>>5903706
Nothing. You've already made up your mind about what 'Social Justice' is, so you can twist facts to suit your preconceptions.

>>5904746
>Ended a long time ago

people were not just physically segregated for decades, but they were economically segregated for decades. and if you were to go to those segregated areas today (where they of course no longer are segregated), the economic legacy is still obvious. the white neighborhoods are still nice white neighborhoods, the segregated poor black neighborhoods are still poor and black. physical segregation ended, but the money didn't didn't. how do you think public schools are funded? with property taxes. you think it's a coincidence that the best public schools are almost always in affluent white neighborhoods? you think it's a coincidence that the worst public schools are always in depressed black neighborhoods? if you take two populations and give one all of the resources for decdes and deprive the other one for decades before saying "OK, you can play together now," you think everything will intermix and change automatically? especially when those who lived with economic and education advantages have a vested interest in preserving the status quo, law change or no?

and that's just ONE example.

>>5904765
No, I would say it is possible poor whites have it worse. Things like affirmative action directly aim to help blacks.

>>5904747
i see that it's unpleasant to read how somebody logically disproves what you believe to be true and you can do nothing but to point with a stupid exclamation...

>>5904768
Are you not an American? Girls suits are bikini style, pink tassled and glittery for fucking babies. They are simultaneously more "closed" and more sexualized. There's no reason a two-year-olds nipples should be taboo enough to make the kid uncomfortable while her brother plays, carefree.

>all this blatant strawman and ad hom from the feminists
It isn't any wonder why no one takes you seriously when you can't even hold a conversation properly.

>>5904774
Correlation doesn't amount to causation. Asians were oppressed in the 20th century. Even when they were being oppressed, they made themselves more prosperous than today's black community.

Should we assume that oppression add to prosperity? With your logical leaps, something as absurd as that would be completely justifiable.

>>5904777
>Women's skin is sexually aggressive

This is insane. It is completely ignorant of what sex is and what aggression is. It's a ridiculous statement and I'm not going to copy paste the definition of aggression for someone this low-functioning.

>>5904784
>twirling around in semantics trying to avoid the cold hard biology
I'll give you one more shot at a proper rebuttal. I know you can do it.

>>5904778
>more sexualized
>implying anyone actually thinks about it that way
In the minds of normal people, babies don't even register as sexual beings. I think this whole fixation says more about you than anything.

>>5904787
Yet when Lena Dunham sexually molests her sister you feminists talk about how natural it is.
God, feminists make me sick.

>>5904787
In the minds of normal people, the same gender doesn't register as sexual either. You need to accept people's differences and stop oppressing people, anon.

File: 4ccb243504fe3f3dd1a53a9205e41fa1b94af3a3a80b9bbb869a4c7a76db3c67_large.jpg (33KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1024x576px

>>5904793
>implying I disagree with this

>>5904778

i already explained you why female nudity always was and should be more tabooed

think for a moment, what's the difference between voice and looks in that example? sound waves vs light waves? intent? but one chooses their clothes by intent too. female nudity shouldn't be treated equally to male nudity, it's simply unfair for males, because, yes, it may be a slightly strong comparison but it's an aggression vs them, you see how aggression is possible without physical contact

also i'm beginning to suspect that you are a pedo with all these 'sexualized swimsuits' and desire to look at naked little girls

>>5904795
Because men and women "think differently". Pseudoscience

And please, it's literally everywhere. When I started to get into studio ghibli I was shocked by the lack of sexualization, not because I wanted it but because I'd grown up with Disney and it put it into perspective by comparison.

>>5904787
I was abused as a child so maybe I'm more sensitive to it; but it is very clear when you work around it every fucking day. We also had to call the cops on a man filming little girls with an ipad. Not that that's relevant. I've spiked my eggnog by now

>>5904805
>Men and women don't think differently.
You are literally incompetent. Please remove yourself from existence.

>>5904805

no, that's the claim that they think identically is a wish-fulfilling pseudoscience

images affect males significantly stronger than females, it's a proven fact and it doesn't depend on society etc, it's not a type of social behavior, it's pure biology

if feminists respected biology more (and if they didn't tried to oppose real man and real women with their fantasies)... imo if you are interested of feminism and don't want to use it as a tool for personal gain, ditch it and consider to be a humanist instead

>>5904825
This.
However, Feminists think they can "re-educate" males.

>>5904009
>no, its all talk
>nope
>nope
>presbyterian

>>5904770
I mean there are statistics you can look up, i'm just not perky enough on christmas eve to look them up for you.

>>5904009

>1) Who here considered themselves a social justice warrior, or advocate for social justice?

yes, in a Rawlsian sense

>2) Who here has a tumblr account?

nope

>3) Who here is female?

nope

>4) Who here is Jewish?

nope

>>5903706
>he literally seeks out literature that panders to his petty dislikes
sad

>>5904920
>D-Don't read books that agree with you!
cuck detected

>>5904009
yes
no
no
no

>>5904924
You're a bit of a dork.

>>5904825
If men are stimulated to the point of violence by women doing basic things, i.e. wearing shorts, maybe they SHOULD all be locked up/castrated.

Devil's advocating, but that's where your logic flows. Men can't control themselves so they need to restict others' freedoms. Men sound animalistic, inferior and dangerous.

>>5904825
>'pure biology'
>2014
>mfw

>>5904970
nobody spoke about violence against women due to them demonstrating their bodies, it's your own rape oddity or rather your following the trend of shaming men for 'rape culture' made you to bring this question despite the topic was about sexual aggression against men, not of sexual agression against women

significant disturbance which naked bodies of women commit to men should be respected regardless if it makes additional danger for women or not, actually even more in the latter case

>>5904230
Their tone and tactics are pretty awful, but I think that there is more to be concerned about than that. Their wanting to limit free speech and reverse the burden of proof in sexual assault cases is pretty scary, even if its mostly confined to the internet (for now)

>>5904989
>Their wanting to limit free speech and reverse the burden of proof in sexual assault cases is pretty scary

lol

>>5903706
Moldbug.

>>5904989
>their wanting to limit free speech

I live right near where John Crawford was gunned down on sight by cops in a Wal-Mart and let me tell ya, the sheer volume of conservatives saying shit like "shoot the protesters", "why are we letting them protest", etc., is all I'm seeing around here. I'm not quite seeing SJWs trying to literally restrict free speech

>>5904994
Yeah, i don't deal with a lot of conservatives, but it's not like it's ok if conservatives are worse about it, come on

>>5904997
I'm not saying worse about it, I'm saying literally attempting to restrict it. Most "SJWs" view things like anti-abortion rallies and what have you as disgusting and simply move on, whereas conservatives literally want to restrict the right to free speech and protest

>>5904983
This "significant disturbance" being......a tingle in your boner? If that really happens regularly for you on slight provocation, I pity you I guess; but it doesn't outweigh the "significant disturbance" women would face by dressing to avoid startling your dick 24/7. It's polite to dress modestly, it's considered in "good taste" even in 2014. But your dick doesn't deserve to set legislation.

>>5904999

this is patently false on ur end stop bein obtuse u turbonerd

>>5905003

bruh in a realpolitik sense the dick that has subjugated women will set legislation unless u turn the future generation of men obsequious 2 gay ass "morally correct" ideas regardless so *tha-whump* deal nerd :gunny:

>>5904970
You seem to believe that men and women are equal. They are not. The entirety of history demonstrates that men are superior and that women are only necessary for spawning children.

If an animal's behaviour drives a man to do something repugnant, it is the animal's behaviour that must change. Similarly, women must have their behaviour kept in line. It is objectively proven by history that not keeping their behaviour in line is just like letting any other animal free to ravage civilization as it pleases. The consequences are always negative and lead to the society being supplanted by more virile and manly cultures.

The more power and "freedom" women get, the more animalistic and dyscivic they become. Like any other type of livestock, they require training and care by men if they are to be useful and not a resource drain at best and actively destructive at worst.

>>5905003

so you turned into a personal attack now? that's rather pitiful on your part

why do you think that the right of women to dress as their want overweight the right of men not to be sexually attacked? [mind you men aren't even against to be attacked that way, lol, just don't complain that you are treated as a sexual object afterwards] the society is an agreement of people where everybody gives away some part of their freedom to serve others. men gave away quite a lot of their freedom (otherwise you simply wouldn't have the internet access, lol)

>>5904999
What do conservatives have to do with anything? This thread isn't about conservatives, and I didn't mention conservatives.

>>5905030
Brought in as an illustration that anon's conception of the SJW free speech restriction isn't nearly as awful as thought of and this group displays that quite well

>>5903706
The entire cannon is written by dead white guys, so, all of it.

>>5905022
Using superior strength, the only area in which men are superior--( women being better intellectuals, nurturers, more creative, and better communicators) men were able to subjugate women and write a history that made them look good. Now that physical strength is irrelevant, women are making big strides in subjugating men. Men are bigger and dumber than women, statistically more violent, significantly less graceful or agile; and base and animalistic in their sexual desires and urges. They can be manipulated very easily through their base and uncomplicated sexualities. Any 6 who knows her way around a dick can wrap 99% of men around her little finger, because men really are that stupid. Men commit the vast majority of violent crimes, statistics don't lie --exhibiting their lack of self-control and violent nature. In terms of communication and creativity, the average man is a joke. He literally appears autistic next to a woman. The modern man spends his time watching other men bash into each other fighting over a ball. Men give this industry millions of dollars. Men leave their children more often than women, contributing to the primary degeneration of society. Men are true idiots, animalistic morons; and violent on top of it. They are being and will continue to be subdued for the ultimate benefit of society.
Look I can do it too