Originally posted by Bashar Teg
and of course the IJW's will make 800 threads a day about it.
Except instead of superhumans in tights, it's fedora-tipping reactionaries vs pink-haired hypochondriacs.
Originally posted by Robtard
It does, look how many rise to defend incels on KMC alone.Also, "Incel Defense Force" ran into legal copyright issues with the Israeli government as the acronym for that is also "IDF". I received a letter.
Originally posted by mike brownTrue, but the mens rights movement are a growing enabler of misogyny and bigotry., based on a false sense of loss entitlement and a victim complex often caused by rejection and trauma.
Let's just keep in mind the majority of incels are not shooters but just moderate practitioners of their particular bizarre religion.
Originally posted by mike browni dont disagree with any of your post 👆
I don't care for the mras either though they have a point when it comes to a few specific issues like divorce laws/alimony/etc. I agree though they act like victims too much. They basically adopted the same tactics and tone of 3rd wave feminism but inverted the genders.
Originally posted by mike brown
I don't care for the mras either though they have a point when it comes to a few specific issues like divorce laws/alimony/etc. I agree though they act like victims too much. They basically adopted the same tactics and tone of 3rd wave feminism but inverted the genders.
Agreed. 👆
The way they talk sometimes, if they're not controlled opposition, they're proof no one really need controlled opposition. They do the job better then any plant ever could.
Originally posted by mike brown
I don't care for the mras either though they have a point when it comes to a few specific issues like divorce laws/alimony/etc. I agree though they act like victims too much. They basically adopted the same tactics and tone of 3rd wave feminism but inverted the genders.
As for ‘controlled opposition’, I don’t buy it. There are just too many genuine morons running around for there to be a need for such subterfuge.
And maybe to try and make a position seem worse then it is, like taking an issue that's close to a line way over it.
Generally speaking though, it's usually more about identifying real opposition, and controlling the narrative (Russia did this by creating an opposition party who's real purpose was to identify opponents and their financiers.)
I see it more as basic reactionary politics. There are some genuine things to criticize modern feminists for but as is usually the case with divisive political issues, the response is basically over blown and based on tribal instinct.
It's similar to how the excesses of neoliberal capitalism gives rise to Communists or how the culture shock produced by globalism and mass immigration leads to far right nationalism.
Also as far as the similarity between white power and jihad.. there's a couple good podcasts interviewing this one lady who made documentaries about each of them. Making sense with Sam Harris #144 is one and the other was a recent episode of the Ezra Klein podcast. I haven't seen the actual documentaries but they sound interesting.
I think it's not actually true these movements attract morons and uneducated people. They attract people with identity issues who are looking for a sense of brotherhood and belonging. IIRC the average ISIS recruit is actually better off and more educated than the average citizen from their country of origin. Especially the ones from middle Eastern countries.