Lurker > Sephiroth1288

Ryangrad posted...

Even from that article:

So does that mean we should do away with chivalry altogether? Not necessarily. As Australia's News.com points out, if a man is carrying out these actions because he believes a woman is fragile, and thus requires protection, then he's being sexist. But if he's doing it to be kind? That's just being polite.

The conclusion isnt that chivalry is sexist but that thinking you have to be courteous because a woman is weak and needs this is sexist.

From my article:

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Men who are considered to be sexist in a well-meaning way for example if they are chivalrous or think women need a man to protect them may be more attractive.

No contradiction here.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Ok well probably none of them existed and religion is a terrible justification for making law.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

A_Good_Boy posted...

Weird how that's the only point you respond to.

It wasn't, homie.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Ryangrad posted...

Thats some hilariously garbage wording. Chivalry is not sexism. lol

Well, feminists and the radical left disagree.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/03/11/chivalry-sexist_n_6847264.html
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Men who are considered to be sexist in a well-meaning way for example if they are chivalrous or think women need a man to protect them may be more attractive.

This is what they mean by sexist men. Not sexist people who think women shouldnt vote/be in the work force, but chivalrous men.

How many people have you met who seriously believe women shouldn't vote
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Imagine thinking dailymail is a reliable source

Dailymail didn't do the study
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

And that this is also true of women who consider themselves to be strong feminists

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5908839/Women-hard-wired-meaning-sexist-men-attractive.html?ITO=applenews

Women are more attracted to men who are sexist because they think they are more willing to protect them, provide for them and commit to a relationship, scientists say.

Men who are considered to be sexist in a well-meaning way for example if they are chivalrous or think women need a man to protect them may be more attractive.

Even though women find these men patronising and can feel undermined by them, they are more likely to want to couple up with them than with men who don't give them special treatment.

Researchers say women may be hard-wired to think the benefits of being with a kind but sexist man outweigh the downsides.

...

In the study the researchers write: 'Evidence shows that many women even those who desire [equal] relationships want a man to be chivalrous, by, for example, paying for dates and opening doors for them.

'Furthermore, the finding that high feminist women, and not only low feminist women, rated a [sexist] potential romantic partner as more attractive despite being more aware of the detrimental effects, suggests that the attraction may be a mate preference for women in general, and not just for women who endorse traditional gender roles.

Surprise surprise, women want men to be the breadwinners and pay for dinner.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

post
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

BWLurker posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

COVxy posted...

Those who do best on SAT are those who had SAT tutoring.

Bullshit. You can't tutor your way to an extra 300 points on the SAT.

The hell kind of logic is this? Of course you can. Especially if the tutor is actually teaching you things that were never taught in your garbage curriculum

As others just pointed out, the SAT is designed specifically that you cannot study for it. You can get a higher grade is you study, but the material you would learn is nothing you wouldn't learn from high school. If you didn't learn your times tables in high school, but you go to a tutor for the SAT where you do learn them, then yeah obviously you'll see your score rise a lot. But rich kids, obviously, would know their times tables by the end of high school.

And like that source said, 115 is the average increase from tutoring. It's well below the gap that asian kids need to score in order to make up for the penalty they get from AA.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

He was killed though...
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

COVxy posted...

Those who do best on SAT are those who had SAT tutoring.

Bullshit. You can't tutor your way to an extra 300 points on the SAT.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

COVxy posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

You want to try that first sentence one more time?

Not the most elegant sentence, but proper and readable.

I'll assume you were positing that income is already taken as a factor when admitting students then.

Well if that were the case, and economically disadvantaged students are already given help by most universities, then what use do we have for AA?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

FrisbeeDude posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Why do lefties think that the solution to racism in America is more racism in America?

why does flyover america only care about discrimination when white people are disadvantaged?

Asians and indians are both disadvantaged more than white people in AA
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

COVxy posted...

How often do you think this is the case where it isn't highlighted in the person's application? I say this as a white kid who grew up poor and found my way into a university that was above my resume due to these factors.

You want to try that first sentence one more time?

Blue_Inigo posted...

The point is, QUALIFICATIONS DONT AND WILL NEVER MATTER.

Spoken like a true marxist.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Unknown5uspect posted...

Affirmative action itself is white privilege as it helps white women more than any other demographic. The irony.

If by "more" you mean "numerically more"

Obviously AA benefits black women more than white women.

And giving women an advantage in AA is already completely nonsensical since more women graduate college than men
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Good job, Democrats.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

tennisdude818 posted...

eggcorn posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Unless you're Asian, in which case you literally get punished for your race.

---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

COVxy posted...

Not really, my guess is that the system would be incredibly similar. You are harping on this point because you think you have a gotchya moment, were you can call the other side racist.

But generally, it's not a bad policy to give minorities who have traditionally had a hard time in society a second glance. The issue, in reality, is a lack of empathy from the right, which assumes through their policy that poverty is primarily due to personal choices. I don't expect someone who has grown up affluent to understand what it's like to grow up through poverty. But these are the people who are usually making these policy decisions.

Similar sure, and an income-based policy would still benefit mostly blacks and hispanics over whites and asians, but the most important part is that it would not penalize poor asians and give advantages to rich hispanics.

If you favor a race-based admissions process over an income-based admissions process, please explain why Malia Obama deserves to get an advantage over a poor asian kid.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

LightHawKnight posted...

Blue_Inigo posted...

Spooking posted...

As a business owner, I want to hire people based on skill, not to meet some quota forced upon me.

The quota is forced because in reality, people don't hire based purely on skill. Racial bias is clearly there

Then the rules should be thus: You can't see the picture or the name of the person who is applying, just their list of skills.

Most resumes don't include a photo, so that's already done

But if your resume doesn't have a name on it, how the hell are you supposed to determine who is applying
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

COVxy posted...

But let's not pretend like people on this side of the camp wouldn't have an issue with this as well.

It would still be better than racial discrimination, that's for damn sure.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Blue_Inigo posted...

Nobody is going to watch youtube videos of people just as ignorant as you

tl;dw: If a person is accepted to a university because of more lenient admission requirements, they will get accepted into colleges beyond their capability. Because even though the admissions process is easier, the classes are not. By accepting less-qualified people into high-level universities, they have a much higher likelihood of dropping out, even though they would have easily been able to graduate at a college that is more suited to their ability.

This would be true regardless of the race of the person in question. It also explains why asians, having to meet a way higher standard than everyone else, have way higher graduation rates than anyone else.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

cjsdowg posted...

In case you missed it since we posted at the same time..

A white high school droop out has the same chance of getting a job as black kid with college.
A white criminal has the same chance of getting a job as black guy with no record if everything else is even.

YOU HAVE THE ADVANTAGE ALL READY.

And that's the case even though affirmative action has been in place for like 5 decades?

Maybe affirmative action is part of the problem?



tl;dw: If a person has more lenient acceptance requirements, they will naturally get accepted into colleges beyond their capability. Because even though the admissions process is easier, the classes are not. By accepting less-qualified people into high-level universities, they have a much higher likelihood of dropping out, even though they would have easily been able to graduate at a college that is more suited to their ability.

This would be true regardless of the race of the person in question. It also explains why asians, having to meet a way higher standard than everyone else, have way higher
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

cjsdowg posted...

_RETS_ posted...

cjsdowg posted...

It is funny all the people who support this never say we should end things that give white people advantages.

Such as?

http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/09/28/at_the_elite_colleges___dim_white_kids/

Who are these mediocre white students getting into institutions such as Harvard, Wellesley, Notre Dame, Duke, and the University of Virginia? A sizable number are recruited athletes who, research has shown, will perform worse on average than other students with similar academic profiles, mainly as a result of the demands their coaches will place on them.

A larger share, however, are students who gained admission through their ties to people the institution wanted to keep happy, with alumni, donors, faculty members, administrators, and politicians topping the list.

Applicants who stood no chance of gaining admission without connections are only the most blatant beneficiaries of such admissions preferences. Except perhaps at the very summit of the applicant pile - that lofty place occupied by young people too brilliant for anyone in their right mind to turn down - colleges routinely favor those who have connections over those who don't. While some applicants gain admission by legitimately beating out their peers, many others get into exclusive colleges the same way people get into trendy night clubs, by knowing the management or flashing cash at the person manning the velvet rope.

So it's not advantages for white people, it's advantages for being rich and schools placing too much value on college sports, regardless of your race.

Ok so again why not just give precedence to kids from poor families rather than base it on race
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

BWLurker posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

BWLurker posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

because it furthers perpetuates the educational divide between haves and have nots. want equal guidelines for college admissions? level the playing field in primary and secondary education, but Wh-, I'm sorry, "Trumps" america doesn't seem nearly as willing to have that discussion...I wonder why

So why not base admissions on family income instead of race

Why not?

That's what I'm asking. If you want to give help to the have-nots then why would you have a system based on race where kids from wealthy black families have an advantage over poor people of other races

I'm agreeing with you. Why has such a system not been proposed?

Because Democrats need the black and hispanic vote and that kind of move would appear like a betrayal.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

BWLurker posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

because it furthers perpetuates the educational divide between haves and have nots. want equal guidelines for college admissions? level the playing field in primary and secondary education, but Wh-, I'm sorry, "Trumps" america doesn't seem nearly as willing to have that discussion...I wonder why

So why not base admissions on family income instead of race

Why not?

That's what I'm asking. If you want to give help to the have-nots then why would you have a system based on race where kids from wealthy black families have an advantage over poor people of other races
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

FrisbeeDude posted...

because it furthers perpetuates the educational divide between haves and have nots. want equal guidelines for college admissions? level the playing field in primary and secondary education, but Wh-, I'm sorry, "Trumps" america doesn't seem nearly as willing to have that discussion...I wonder why

So why not base admissions on family income instead of race
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

COVxy posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

That people on the right apparently care more about ending racial discrimination than the left does?

Apparently the right only seems to care about "anti-white discrimination".

Asians are the ethnicity most discriminated against in affirmative action...not white people

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-uncomfortable-truth-about-affirmative-action-and-asian-americans

Please explain why its ok for an asian kid to have to work harder than everyone else to go to the same college, @COVxy
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Samurontai posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Samurontai posted...

Everyone please take not of the posters who are saying this is a good thing itt

Youll notice that they all have something in common

So explain why this is a bad thing.

Im just making an observation

That people on the right apparently care more about ending racial discrimination than the left does?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

emblem boy posted...

Piersons_Fox posted...

Would you rather have your surgery by the most qualified surgeon or by the guy who you can virtue signal over his race?

Ehh, this is about being admitted to the schools. Not about passing and graduating. So not sure how your post makes sense

Kinda hard to graduate from a college when you don't get admitted in the first place.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

"I think Trump is doing a lot of good things"

"Why is your WHOLE IDENTITY based on Trump???"
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

So Trump wants to do away with racial discrimination.

Why is this a bad thing
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Smashingpmkns posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

They are real trophies; what is it about yours that you value?

They represent accomplishment by winning a competition.

Showing up is not an accomplishment nor is it competitive.

Depends on what it is. Showing up to a marathon and finishing even dead last is an accomplishment most people wouldn't even try to attempt in their life

Yeeeah, although I would say that a participation trophy in the case of a marathon would be equivalent to getting a trophy/medal even if you didn't run the whole way.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Balrog0 posted...

They are real trophies; what is it about yours that you value?

They represent accomplishment by winning a competition.

Showing up is not an accomplishment nor is it competitive.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

A_Good_Boy posted...

Would Mal say that Milo himself is a white supremacist or just the people he frequently surrounds himself with?

If Milo joined a National Socialist Party, I would agree he was a white supremacist.

Along with anyone else who joined the NSP.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Darkman124 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

Now I can look at my mantlepiece and remember the rec leagues I played in fondly. What's the problem?

takes up valuable space that could be filled by modern art

Or real trophies
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Ok so how does any of that disprove that she and her party literally want to abolish borders

Was my tl;dr seriously too long for you? INS stands for Immigration and Naturalization Service, the agency that enforced immigration laws prior to 2003. If you don't have a border, you don't need INS...

Abolishing ICE for immigration enforcement with less teeth would be the natural first step towards abolishing borders.

Slippery slope fallacy? Come on mal you can do better than that

It's not a slippery slope when the end of that slope is the stated goal of the Democratic Socialists
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

sktgamer_13dude posted...

But guys, someone marching said it,

It's the official Twitter account for their party...not a random marcher...what's so hard to understand here
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Balrog0 posted...

do you think Ron Paul is racist because he regularly published racist news letters and recently tweeted a racist meme?

Or would you perhaps give him some leeway and maybe say that his staff are to blame, so maybe he is bad at associating with people, but he isn't personally racist?

Has anyone in her party denounced the tweet saying "abolish borders" yet?
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Balrog0 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Ok so how does any of that disprove that she and her party literally want to abolish borders

Was my tl;dr seriously too long for you? INS stands for Immigration and Naturalization Service, the agency that enforced immigration laws prior to 2003. If you don't have a border, you don't need INS...

Abolishing ICE for immigration enforcement with less teeth would be the natural first step towards abolishing borders.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

A_Good_Boy posted...

I don't see her saying that. Maybe pull something up from her Twitter or quotes.

Oh yeah, she's not psychotic, only everyone else in her party is.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Balrog0 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Here's a tweet from the NYC DSA, Ocasio-Cortez' party

https://twitter.com/nycdsa/status/1012808259818926080

You gonna eat that crow now, or will you save it for later @sktgamer_13dude

you can look at what she's said herself instead though

https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1000457866929680386

(snip)

Ok so how does any of that disprove that she and her party literally want to abolish borders
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

sktgamer_13dude posted...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-review/

Are you trying to say they made up shit Obama said
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

CyricZ posted...

Tonight on "That's Not What That Thing Does"

That Democrat darling Ocasio literally wants to ban borders

Mal again talking about things he doesnt understand. Must be a day ending in -y

Here's a tweet from the NYC DSA, Ocasio-Cortez' party

https://twitter.com/nycdsa/status/1012808259818926080

You gonna eat that crow now, or will you save it for later @sktgamer_13dude
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

Asherlee10 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

I once got a participation trophy in middle school for tag football. I threw it away the day I got it.

Why?

I just loathed the idea of a pity trophy.

I mean, I already had trophies for placing in the top 3 in my room for other sports. Having a trophy with no number next to it just felt wrong and out of place, so without anywhere to put it I just tossed it
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

bump
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

CyricZ posted...

Tonight on "That's Not What That Thing Does"

That Democrat darling Ocasio literally wants to ban borders
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

I once got a participation trophy in middle school for tag football. I threw it away the day I got it.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

mario2000 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

mario2000 posted...

that'll teach em to not have sex with me

You bring up sexual impotence way too often for it to not be some form of projection.

no i fuck

Sure you do.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

mario2000 posted...

that'll teach em to not have sex with me

You bring up sexual impotence way too often for it to not be some form of projection.
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/barack-obama-democrats-2018-sound-like-me/

So I guess this means Democrats will start supporting ICE and be harsher towards illegal immigrants

And they'll be more lenient with Russia and be cool with them annexing more territory

And support the war on drugs and maintain a Federal ban on marijuana
---

The person who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience.
Friend Code: 2723-9696-7248