doubtingthomas wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 12:22 am
canpakes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:35 pm
Are you saying that the idea of ‘the left forcing people to flock to alt-right MRA movement personalities’ sounds like a Republican talking point, or my request for details is the Republican talking point?
Saying that no one is forcing them to join alt-right movements is like saying that no one is forcing you to keep your job that you hate.
It’s not the same, because regardless of your life or work situation and outside of some extremely rare circumstances, you
can choose how you interact with strangers. This is not the same as having ‘x’ job, but then not being able to change to a different employer due to time or cash requirements, or local availability, or commute options, or skill set, etc.
In fact, if ‘lonely guys’ joining alt-right movements and deciding to double down on misogyny is what you’re describing, then please tell me how anyone other than the male is responsible for his attitude if he
isn’t in relationships with women? How are the women that he’s
not interacting with
forcing him to adopt any particular attitude?
canpakes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:35 pm
Of course not
all young men. But it is
men flocking to Tate, correct?
I don't know, but Res Ipsa just acknowledged that, "there have been pretty alarming increases in the percentages of high school girls who have the victims of violence, including sexual violence"
My posts are all about helping and protecting young women.
What appears to be the case is that your proposed method of ‘protecting young women’ is to tell them that they need to talk to strangers, on the hopes that the misogynistic attitudes of some of those strangers won’t manifest in
danger or violence to those women. Almost as if you’re saying, “You’d better socialize, or … “. Or,
what? How does that make sense to you?
Just
who is in control of
what problem, exactly?