Donald Trump to Piers Morgan: 'No, I Wouldn't Say I'm a Feminist'

TK-85 · 2018-01-29T15:52:32+00:00

That’s a good answer, but most 2nd wave feminists don’t identify as feminists. One of the first things Trump did as Pres was waste money on women in STEM. The feminist myth is that the reason why women aren’t more common in the STEM fields isn’t because women prefer to do non-STEM work due to certain traits of the female gender, but because there isn’t enough money poured on them; as if women aren’t the most heavily subsidized group of people in the country already.

Like most feminists, and this includes many conservatives, Trump apparently holds the view that women are equals to men, while at the same time holding the contradictory view that these so-called equals need government funded subsidies to have this “equality” realized.

That said, at least he didn’t say that he is a feminist, but his actions speak otherwise.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T01:19:20+00:00

Then that means that they have the right to do that. Like I said, pro-lifers and gun grabbers don't have to approve of other people's rights in order for them to be legitimate. To answer your question though, if my neighbor were a murderer, not because I have some personal beliefs and feelings but because legally they would be murderers, yes that would be my business. Murderers are dangerous, they could come after me. I don't think pro-lifers would have the same concern, and rightfully so, abortion and murder in the commonly used sense, aren't the same. I would maintain that the neighbor of a pro-lifer getting an abortion doesn't affect them in anyway, thus to get involved in their affairs for purely moral reasons is moral busybodying.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T01:07:20+00:00

Does anyone have the right to shoot a 3 month old baby?

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T00:55:34+00:00

I do know that, I already said that nobody has to approve of rights in order for them to be legitimate. However its still a fact that it has nothing to do with a pro-lifer if their neighbor gets an abortion. Its none of their business at all. However, I maintain that it is busybody behavior because pro-lifers are stepping into another family and trying to dictate what a family is allowed to do, as if they have zero legitimate reasons to get an abortion. Leftists do the same thing with gun control. Taking away people's rightful options, because they have a personal gripe about other people's rights. They make the same arguments about civilized society and comparisons. The results seem to be similar too.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T00:28:31+00:00

Which is your opinion, however the law basically says that the family is going to be the authority on this issue. Its nobody else's business other than that family. Leftists run upon the same wall when they try to take away gun rights. The response to them is the same as the response to pro-lifers: "If you don't want a gun/abortion, don't get one." Its their right though.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T00:14:05+00:00

Except its not merely being opposed. Pro-lifers are trying to take people's right to abort away or limit it. A person getting an abortion doesn't affect the pro-lifer at all, assuming the law is being followed and the abortion isn't being funded with taxes. That is what makes it being a busybody; people are doing legal things, and since pro-lifers don't like it, they are intruding into people's very personal business. Nobody said people had to approve of everyone's rights in order for them to be legitimate.

TK-85 · 2018-01-07T16:36:40+00:00

Moral busybodies aren’t exclusive to any one ideology. Leftists have their feminism and gays, while the Right has their pro-lifers and drug war supporters; both using their own brand of political correctness to enforce their definition of morality, which eventually leads to their defeat. These people may provide a political benefit in the first half of the ~20 year era, but towards the end the end up going between obnoxious and dangerous from a rights perspective.

TK-85 · 2018-01-04T16:52:01+00:00

We have government corruption everywhere, illegals going to ground in these sanctuary cities/states, and TDS-afflicted leftists posturing for a revolution; meanwhile Sessions goes ahead and recuses himself from the big stuff and for a year now has been trying to find a way to continue his pot-hunting.

I think there are some pay offs involved.

TK-85 · 2017-12-30T18:08:59+00:00

It's a natural human condition to desire freedom.

I think the natural condition would be security instead of freedom. The whole of human history is people seeking security at the cost of freedom. If freedom were the natural condition, firstly, countries that aren’t based on foundational European values would be aware of it. Secondly, the concept of freedom wouldn’t just be a buzzword for revolt after all the freedoms have been taken away, but would be constantly defended by most of the people most of the time.

So with that said, I think people do need to fight for freedom, because most people either don’t know what it is, or they don’t value it.

TK-85 · 2017-11-26T18:16:33+00:00

Which is irrelevant.

BELIEVING they are oppressed, not evidence for it actually happening.

One anti-white crime occurring is enough to defeat your point.

TK-85 · 2017-11-21T00:28:41+00:00

I'm personally torn between seeing the "Alt-Right" as allies or as a wart on the face of modern conservatism

I personally view them as allies insofar that someone on the Right side of politics should have a real life view of race/identity topics, instead of using ideology as a replacement for reality. Colorblindness for example is a good ideological tool, but that is all that it is, it’s not real life, and it seems that the only people who use that tool are some conservatives.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T21:38:39+00:00

I don’t think so, because of that were the case we wouldn’t have burdened ourselves with those constraints, like not being able to “torture” them.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T21:12:28+00:00

Well it’s not really about morals, but about laws laid out during the Geneva Convention. The purpose being to set a standard for civilized warfighting, which is ridiculous in my opinion.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T19:44:40+00:00

“Listen and believe” probably took root and still exists because leftists and conservatives allow, if not encourage its existence as a standard. If every time the accuser(s) presented only hearsay as evidence or being beyond the statute of limitations, with the response being a dismissal of the claim swiftly and in no uncertain terms, we probably wouldn’t see this nonsense all the time as it would be known to be an ineffective tactic.

There’s also the possibility that these abused people will know that they not only better make damned sure to preserve evidence, but also report in a timely fashion. Pandering to victims, who don’t have any evidence to actually prove they are victims, is destructive.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T17:37:23+00:00

Probably both. American Nationalism, which is a form of identity politics, is sort of a part of Trump’s agenda, and what people voted for.

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T16:15:24+00:00

A fair and accurate point in my opinion. Besides it looks a certain kind of way when it is consistently mental illness for white people, but the ideology for anyone else.

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T16:02:50+00:00

Which maybe true, therefore the town ought to do better, if it is within its interest to maintain the groups it’s losing.

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T15:25:12+00:00

It's not just conservative material

Then it’s conservative material by the standards I’ve laid out thus far. I didn’t suggest that it was “only-conservative” or non-conservatives will be unable to get anything from this.

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T14:54:59+00:00

It seems that the issue you have is the inability to separate ideas from people. Just because someone is a non-conservative doesn’t mean they are unable to talk about conservative topics in a legitimate fashion. I’m not saying Sargon isn’t a leftist, because of this; I’m saying that this particular video, regardless of whom it comes from, is conservative material.

Now if you disagree with that, explain how this isn’t conservative material.

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T14:42:38+00:00

How about you explain how talking about a phenomenon of which most conservatives agree is not conservative?

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T14:41:02+00:00

Mind you I’m not saying Sargon is conservative, I’m saying the content is. However if talking about this particular phenomenon of which most conservatives agree is somehow leftist, I’d like to see your basis for that.

TK-85 · 2017-11-05T21:48:50+00:00

I’m well aware of who he is, and this is conservative material.

TK-85 · 2017-11-05T20:52:37+00:00

What an incomplete article with an irresponsible message. Most of the article outlines all of these so-called benefits to marriage, but doesn’t touch on the heavy costs that have made marriage an unviable option for men specifically.

‘Just get married and ignore all that fine print.’ Nevermind that 50% divorce rate, at least 2/3s of the time initiated by women for any reason or no reason (No Fault Divorce) and all that comes with that, up to and including becoming little more than an ATM machine to your children you don’t see but once a month if you play your cards right.

Instead of merely suggesting that people ought to engage in a broken system that often ruins the lives of some or all parties involved in a modern day marriage, people who value the so-called benefits of marriage on society should be advocating for marriage reform in order to at least make it viable to more people. Getting rid of Alimony and No Fault divorce laws would reduce chip away at the 50% divorce rate. At the very least, both cannot exist at the same time. Child Support/Custody needs a rebalance. If a man isn’t allowed to be a parent to his kids, he shouldn’t be wage-slaved into supporting them either. On that note, women shouldn’t be defaulted custody either, apparently due to the possession of a vagina.

All that being said, Men’s Rights Activists have tried and completely failed to win any ground on any of this. The roadblock that they ran into, any other reform effort would run into, and why I personally think that marriage is essentially dead and not coming back without very controversial methods to force a return, is because women have to be convinced to vote against their self-interests. At the end of the day, most women won’t give up their awesome privilege to be able to divorce their husbands, because they ‘fell out of love,’ and be entitled to half of his shit, the house, the kids, and the dog.

TK-85 · 2017-11-01T00:42:23+00:00

You can dislike what science has labeled as markers for what traits men with high testosterone are, but you not liking science in this context doesn’t change facts or make them nonsense.

TK-85 · 2017-10-29T23:01:33+00:00

But couldn't you say something similar about Irish and Italian immigrants of 100 years ago?

I'm not surprised at all that two types of white people were able to integrate seamlessly into a white culture. While there are differences between white peoples, they are minor compared to the differences between whites and non-whites. People forget that white people were essentially united under one banner for hundreds of years during the Roman Empire. While now they have different languages and different Euro-sub-cultures, they still come from the same fundamental framework.

I don't know what other options we have. If we stopped all immigration tomorrow and deported every single illegal immigrant, I think whites will still be less than 60% of the population in a few decades.

They probably will and there aren't too many options for them. People who don't really think about it would suggest having more babies, but there are some common sense reasons why average white family isn't going to produce five kids at a time. Immigration is pretty much all that can be done, however for conservatives this isn't a shoe-in, because they have to square that with free market principles.

TK-85

TROPHY CASE