There's a term for it called "abolish the family".
But what happens when you push communist ideology into a a society like ours is it's just used to beat the lower class of people with. Rich peoples gamilies remain fairly unaffected. By that I mean rich families already have issues and they don't get better or worse. Poor peoples familes are beaten apart.
This seems like that "accuse others of doing that which you are already doing" thing.
It's not exactly wrong:
I'm saying that Imp specifically is a propagandist and uses women's fallibility to lend credence to his cause. He doesn't just hate women, he's a woman hating cartoon character. It doesn't matter what his group of choice is, he argues unreasonably for a specific end.
Because he's using feminists tactics:
I'm saying that feminists are propagandists and uses men's fallibility to lend credence to their cause. They don't just hate men, they're a man hating cartoon character. It doesn't matter what his group of choice is, they argues unreasonably for a specific end.
Take a look at the rebbit feminism sub front page:
- men talk to my male friend/partner first instead of me (men annoying)
- a lot of men think rape can be funny or fun (men bad and inherently evil)
- trying to blame-shift "toxic masculinity" to "we decided it's bad so it must have been invented by men (mra's)" (blame the victim basically)
- I went to the beach in bagladesh and here's a bunch of men staring at me (men threatening)
- We found a case on another continent where men committed a nasty sounding crime against a woman...that's why you need to continue psychologically destroying the men around you
- Exact headline: "It's 2021 and women are still not considered humans (by men) socially, politically & legally" (hysterically inaccurate claims in order to push attacking and hating men)
Yeah, theimpossible 1 acts like a milder version of a feminist.
The reason they don't like theimpossible1 is because the thing they hate the most, is someone treating them, like they treat other people.
If we could ban all feminists and also anti-feminist stuff that would be my ideal. This whole thing is a huge shitshow.
It's really simple.
These narrative are about power.
They (which is often other women) control women by doling out small amounts of validation in exchange for doing, thinking, or feeling what they want them to.
If a man starts validating the woman around him they are absolutely pissed - it's like a rival drug cartel springing up. A woman can't control other women via tiny handouts of validation if someone else is giving it out for free.
Eh, I mean this reads exactly like the propaganda style the left has been using to target what I think they see as their "base" of semi-autistic women.
She feels strong sexual feelings at erratic times.
Make it like a heroic narrative for women - you feel better because the story is that it was those feelings are wrong, and someone else's fault.
It's like the "hunt down and kill the dragon" story for men, but aimed at the female-incel type.
Come on, this is right out of the feminist playbook.
Joe Biden wins Election....something-something-something-sex-sex-sex...look guys Kamala Harris is installed as president.
It's a familiar script:
- sexual accusations
- subverted expectations - this times it's (draws card) "incest" and "revealed by the other parties source"
- entertain their semi-autistic female base: another story of how her confusion over her erratic and unpredictable sexual feelings is explained away by them being something else's fault and always bad
- released friday night right as the weekend starts
They've been doing this exact script since...2014? Some people say it's the same script from the 70's, 60's, etc.
That's all the woman bashing is. Anyone who isn't a true 110er redditor knows that women are simply more susceptible to ideological possession and go with whatever the prevailing culture is. Thinking they're the actual driving force behind anything is retarded.
Naw, this ^ is why, you can always fall back on the social norm that women are never held responsible for anything.
You should have known how hateful this would go when the first thing being pushed was "you can't hate women...also, you're scum because of your gender because 'women' say so".
Everyone - including the average woman - was better off when woman bashing was just as common as men-bashing.
We'll just it pro-trans-representation.
In a side note, what is it about psychologically manipulative narratives and dismembering genitals? Circumcision, mutilation, "reshaping" or whatever, there's always some elememt of them that involves a blade and people's private parts.
The point you missed is that "logical fallacy" never disproves something.
Shitty internet poster response is to claim that slippery slope "disproves" something but all it actually show is that it's not 100% proven. Yeah slippery slope means it doesn't go there 100% of the time, but when it's 80% instead that's hardly disproving it.
Sigh. What logical fallacy actually means is that something seems to prove something 100% but that is not the case
John wears a coat in the winter.
A person walks into Johns house in the winter wearing a coat.
That person must be John.
This is a logical fallacy because the criteria do not prove 100% the conclusion.
But obviously, it doesn't prove the person isn't john either.
Logical fallacies never, ever prove that something is not true.
They can't fathom that the plebes aren't hanging on their every word and command.
In my opinion it's closer to a child who wants attention, and doesn't differentiate between positive attention and negative attention.
Fyi, Blizzard stock price is down 14% today. A few months after what can only be described as an invasion of blizzard under the banner of white women taking mens jobs, profits are down and the future of the games they're working on is decidedly less optimistic.
When violence is needed - which it is periodically - women are so used to offloading the unfortunate work onto men, then complaining about it, they've come to believe this is true.
With no men to do the rare-but-necessary violence needed, women will simply become more violent. From sociopathic early teens who stab their girl-friends to death, to female cops who shoot their female partner for leaving them for another woman, the violence and sociopathy that is highlighted as something men do will simply be done by women instead when there's no men around.
There's phrase for this, about activists defeating their enemies by holding them rigidly to their own sense of morality. Basically beating them with their own morality.
You'll notice the sneer you get from them as they actively encourage actual gangs on their side while shaming you for doing something that only barely resemvles a gang at all.
Or maybe it's simply the "accuse your enemies of that which you are doing".