0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Keep it going. You're so close to being the mental god you believe you are. Just one more response and it will prove me wrong, and not only will you change my ways in a deep and profound matter, you'll actually change every single person reading it. You're making a massive difference in this niche corner of the internet through your big brain.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

It's sad how easy it has been to get you to write paragraphs and paragraphs about how much you really want to engage in violence against people that want to unironically be left alone and engage in voluntary and consensual co-operation. Like it's clear that I'm not reading this because I don't care what you have to say, but you're so hell bent on winning an internet argument that you bite the bait every time. Which funnily enough shows just how poorly you would do at any sort of "governing" since you can't even show enough self control to not respond to obvious bait.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Damn son, that's a whole lot of writing that completely ignores and avoids the key principle of voluntarism being brought up.

Please, do share more about how you wish you could force others to do your bidding so you can achieve your utopia. I'm sure any day you'll bring about true peace and prosperity on earth any day now, so long as they follow your specific brand of statism.

-1
AccountWasFree -1 points ago +3 / -4

Libertarianism isn't anti-collectives. Voluntarism, an integral subsection of libertarianism, is EXPLICITLY about the voluntary nature of collaboration (hence the name).

Your nice long leftist meme of a wall text amounts to nothing more than statism. Licking the boot in the hopes that when you're in charge, you'll be a just and holy leader through the needed means of subjugation that will lead them to the promised ends of salvation. Just ignore that it's never happened, isn't happening and will never happen.

The problem with "the greater good" is that every ideologue uses it to justify any immorality they rationalise to "need".

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

Isn't that just the vast majority of the mainstream internet?

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

or that filthy pervert Fish

Of course he's in cahoots with Fish.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think it's the other way around. I think he wants to be a woman so bad and sees women as an oppressive force that has something he wants but he knows he will never have, so he hates on them to avoid hating himself for what he will never be.

Or he's just legitimately nuts akin to people who unironically believe in things like gangstalking.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +5 / -1

You're right. I'm not here to treat you kindly when you're advocating that children be mutilated. You're a barbaric piece of shit who abused your sons. And you'll continue to say you did the right thing because you can't possibly accept that you did the wrong thing and were lied to.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +5 / -2

My comment stated experienced fact, no opinion

Yeah yeah, we've all heard the "lived experiences" line before, nothing will change the fact that it's entirely anecdotal and has no hard evidence to back you up, and there is zero reason to even believe that you are telling the truth.

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

Don't forget the growing replication crisis which isn't limited to the soft sciences and has grown to such an insane degree that hard sciences are also facing growing issues with replication.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

It kinda sucked too, because I liked the idea of "pro-bending" (even if it was dropped really quickly by the creators). But you're right, this is supposedly professional bending where elites should be, and it just felt lame because none of these benders were anything special.

8
AccountWasFree 8 points ago +9 / -1

Oh wow, anecdotal experience. Whew lads, I guess I was wrong despite all the evidence to the contrary, better keep up with the barbaric mutilation.

Tell me, why do we not cut off clitoral hoods? It's entirely analogous to a foreskin, yet we only mutilate one half of the population. Better yet, you're arguing in the name of hygiene, the only (minor) "benefit" of routine infant mutilation. So I ask you, will you be also advocating for the removal of newborn's ears since there are so many out there that do such a poor job of hygiene when it comes to their ears? Maybe we should also lop off young women's breasts once they develop as a preventative to breast cancer?

Or is it that we should only resort to such measures as a response, and not as a preventative since it's so utterly insane that you would actually defend mutilating children?

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

Morally, it's absolutely just as bad. Mutilation is mutilation, plain and simple. And there is the obvious exemption of these for reactive medical procedures as opposed to the current method of using mutilation as a preventative. We're not cutting off tits to prevent breast cancer, they get cut off in response to breast cancer. And these genital issues should be the same.

But in terms of numbers and pure statistical analysis, the foreskin holds something like 15,000 nerve endings, which compared to the clitoris itself (not the clitoral hood) only has about 4,000. Mind you, I might be off with my numbers, it's been a while since I've really spoken on this topic but I do remember that the foreskin has significantly more nerve endings than the clitoris.

6
AccountWasFree 6 points ago +6 / -0

Nah, those studies have been bunk for a while and they rely on the comparison of first, second and third world nations as if they're all the same when they're not alike nations. The perpetuation of this myth has actually created serious harm in third world countries where they perform incredibly nasty "circumcision" in unclean environments with rusty utensils on adults and proceed to have unprotected sex thinking that they're now safe.

What's more is that STI's have virtually nothing to do with hygiene. You can't wash away chlamydia. Herpes isn't solved with a bit of soap. That involves actual medicine and/or protective prevention, which means the idea that circumcision helps prevent STIs completely bunk. The ONLY argument is hygiene, at which point you might as well advocate that we lop off the ears of every newborn because some people don't clean them well enough.

12
AccountWasFree 12 points ago +12 / -0

Korra had a certain charm despite being far inferior.

I think the thing that really bugged me about Korra was just how lowly they cheapened bending in general. Gone was the respect for martial arts. Korra can learn complex air bending in the span of minutes after "unlocking" it (while all the other new benders arbitrarily both struggle and repeatedly airbend on accident. Mako, a literal street rat, could lightning bend with ease. Metal bending, while reasonably explained, was common to all hell though would have been fine if this was the only one on the list where the bending was cheapened. Blood bending was cheapened by the virtue of having it done without a full moon. Magma bending was cool (even if it was originally implied as an Avatar ability through the combination of fire and earth bending seen via Roku), but that too was cheap since it was instantly learned and nearly mastered the instant it was "unlocked".

It was just disappointing to see such a rich, well defined world become so bland as a result. Skill and mastery was replaced by commonality and mere desire. When everyone can be the hero, nobody is really the hero, and undermines the necessity of even having an avatar.

23
AccountWasFree 23 points ago +24 / -1

Always worth noting that circumcision gained mass popularity within America due to two factors. One being the jewish population, but the second being of course Kellogg, who promoted it to discourage sexuality. He also promoted female circumcision, and no it wasn't the FGM that most instinctively think of but rather the removal of the clitoral hood. Shockingly, only one of these ideas gained widespread acceptance.

19
AccountWasFree 19 points ago +22 / -3

There is no health benefit to routine infant circumcision, and the only health problem that circumcision helps with is phimosis, something that has nothing to do with "polite society" as you allude to societal medical quality, since phimosis isn't a disease/infection.

Either you're incredibly ignorant, or you're coping with the reality that you've been going along with a very evil lie that you could have easily seen was false if only you cared to see.

25
AccountWasFree 25 points ago +27 / -2

no longer needed

It was never needed. Any supposed benefits are explicitly a lie and always have been, with the only exception being phimosis, an issue that doesn't present/become an issue until after puberty and therefore doesn't justify routine infant circumcision.

42
AccountWasFree 42 points ago +43 / -1

Just remember, anyone pushing the idea that circumcision is done for ANY reason other than aesthetic/religious grounds (namely medical) is outright lying, and a very VERY simply comparison can be made between first world nations to see this effect, considering that nations that aren't within North America generally have inverse rates of circumcision (IIRC, it's something like 1 in 5 in North America are intact, while in other developed countries it's at a similar inversion of 4 in 5 being intact), and despite those differences there is no noticeable difference regarding genital issues between these developed nations.

It's not a secret. It's not confusing. This is blatant and simple data comparison. We're not comparing backwater countries to developed countries. We're comparing nations that have comparable medical standards. And sadly, so many people cannot come to terms with the reality that circumcision is absolutely barbaric.

Routine Child Mutilation was definitely one of the biggest wakeup calls to me personally. It showed how clearly you could lay down the information and fools would still refuse to accept what was so obvious, because accepting it made them complicit with the evil of the world that they continually turn a blind eye to.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +4 / -0

Let's say it is impossible: why does that mean you shouldn't try? These people broke the law. It's also impossible to catch every murderer, rapist and pedophile, should we therefore not try to catch ever murderer, rapist and pedophile? What makes this supposed "impossibility" any different?

I fucking despise this defeatist mentality. Assuming he isn't controlled opposition, it's just self-defeating bullshit. Deporting 100% of illegal immigrants would be awesome. If you can't do that, deport 90%. If you can't do that, deport 80%. Keep working down, and once you achieve a goal, then go back to the next goal in the line. It's not something that will be done overnight, but it needs to be started somewhere.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Wah, you didn't debate me

Go back to Reddit.

Wah, I got the bad internet points

Go back to Reddit.

Wah, antisemitism

Go back to Reddit.

PS. Since you're so eager for that "debate brah" attitude, quote me where I'm A) acting like a victim and B) intentionally and consciously spreading vicious antisemitic rhetoric. After all, I'm sure you're not a raging hypocrite that's relying on projection, D&C and general entryism, now are you?

6
AccountWasFree 6 points ago +7 / -1

Nah, they're just trying to make it seem stunning and brave to be a cuck.

11
AccountWasFree 11 points ago +11 / -0

Fuck it, go ahead and make the cuckest character in the series black. I actually don't care on this one.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Lol, re-read what I said. I was pretty clear and explicitly already stated why I think you support censorship. I don't think you advocated for it, but I think you support it. And it's pretty funny that you have to split hairs like that because you tried to be implicit rather than explicit, but it doesn't matter when someone actually points it out.

Run along back to reddit if you're so intent on being offended because someone clocked you.

view more: Next ›