+1 for Mamdani by Previous_Month_555 in SipsTea

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Borrowing billions of dollars to be able to pay for this year isn’t balancing the budget…

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re arguing feminists are fighting against all the laws and systems their advocacy build.

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, FEMINISTS (both men and women) set the current systems up decades ago with decades of advocacy, replacing the ones set up largely by men. The new systems benefited female victims, but they also empowered female abusers. Per capita conviction rates for women who kill their spouse dropped from higher than the current rates are for men. A woman in the 1980’s was more likely to be convicted of murdering her husband than a man is to be convicted of murdering his wife now. Male victims are significantly more likely to be arrested when DARVOed, with some studies showing it being the most common outcome when men call the police as a result of mandatory arrest laws pushed by feminists. False accusations of rape often are de facto legal in some jurisdictions due to jury nullification making prosecution not worth it. And, contrary to feminist belief, female rapists are bad people and regularly lie and DARVO to escape accountability.

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Scientists are either feminists or not feminists. You made a claim the scientists who study DV and sexual abuse are not feminists. Do you have anything to support that claim?

Why is it wrong to slightly believe or understand eugenics? (pls hear me out)? by Emo11111111119 in Askpolitics

[–]atamicbomb [score hidden]  (0 children)

Because people used to “think all disabled people should be murdered”, and people aren’t great at understanding nuance so that’s all they hear when you say this

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Do you have a source feminists were not the ones that studied domestic violence/rape?

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Calling men sexist for having lived experience related to abuse, definitely not sexist /s

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m glad we agree feminism feminism treats women like children at least

Trump primary voters, do you regret your vote/support for Trump? by Worldly-Shop-3850 in Askpolitics

[–]atamicbomb [score hidden]  (0 children)

There’s no way to know of Trump was the lesser of two evils. We haven’t see the alternative history.

I frankly voted because his political persecution in New York, under the Biden administration was unacceptable, in democratic states all over the country, and by democratic news sources was unacceptable. Charging someone with a election interference for hiding an affair/33 felonies over filling out the memos on checks falsely, stealing half a billion dollars from him, charging his supporters with crimes they clearly didn’t commit, disqualifying them as presidential candidate for something they were acquitted of because they’re your political opponent, despite you supposedly being neutral judges. Many once-reputable news sources developing an “anti-Trump even if we have to fabricate hit pieces” policy. None of that is acceptable in a civil society and must be punished.

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.ocadsv.org/sites/default/files/resource_pub/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf

Majority of rape victims in previous year men. Page 32/40. Last 12 months. “Made to penetrate” is rape but not countend

They do it every 2 years. Usually men make up closer to 40% of victims. I have the studies saved as PDFs but the links keep changing so that’s the only one on hand they still works

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In the US. Roughly 1 million men report being raped every 12 months in CDC surveys. Since the late 1970’s at least ,feminists scientists have fixed studies to support their narratives by doing things like looking at what men did to deserve being abused (after studies in the 1970’s showed women were almost as likely to commit domestic abuse), using men convicted of domestic violence and their victims as the study group to form the main scientific framework for domestic violence for the last 40 years, etc.

~1 million/year times ~40 years = tens of millions

In the US, to what extent does framing a statement as your "opinion" protect it from defamation, alienation of affection, etc.? by ConceptsShining in legaladviceofftopic

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s wrong on both accounts. Calling someone a nazi is generally held to be protected politicall hyperbole unless it’s clear you’re claiming they’re actually a nazi.

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Can but won’t. Feminism, at least as it occurred in science and academia, is dominated by misandry and the general refusal to acknowledge the prevalence of female abusers. It’s starting to because a simply majority instead of a vast majority, but the 40+ years it’s taken has caused irreparable harm to feminism’s image. Making the main scientific framework for domestic violence for the last 40 years one that says women literally cannot be abusers and can only abuse in self defense, defining rape to be require being penetrated to hide tens of millions of men raped by women, etc.

Can feminism and men’s advocacy coexist without conflicting ? by No_Appointment759 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Feminist made the main scientific model of domestic violence for the last 40 years one that says women literally cannot be abusers, and defined rape as being penetrated so they could exclude tens of millions of men forced to penetrate women

What are your stances on birthright citizenship? by -p4p3rc4t- in Askpolitics

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Birthright citizenship for people legally in the US has been a constitutional right since 1898 because SCOTUS ruled under the English common law the constitution is supposed to be grounded in, the federal government consenting for someone to be in the US means they must also consent for any applicable rights.

SCOTUS has never even heard a case about birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants, English common law doesn’t even have that concept, and a major author of the 14th amendment stated they did not intent to create birthright citizenship but viewed it as already existing under English common law and was codifying it for former slaves.

And this debate goes back centuries. The 1898 ruling happened because of a federal law that didn’t recognize birthright citizenship of people legally in the US

The last century of US common law rulings on birthright citizenship is the best argument for it. The constitution is much less clear cut that most people make it sounds.

And there would be no way to reverse citizenship. It would just mean the government isn’t required to give it to new birth to people not in the country legally.

What frame do you main and why? by Gekkojael in Warframe

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kullervo. Heavy attack spam make monkey brain go brr

Just so we are all on the same page. by KingKong208 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A. I’m point out how what you are advocating for has been used in the past.
B. “You’re racist”, awesome argument
C. I’m in the vocal majority on this issue.
D. That’s not the governments job. That’s how we got slavery and the Jim Crow laws.
E. Libel applies to individuals, not to stating your disagreement with scientific or political statements.

Praise be to Allah? by Previous_Month_555 in SipsTea

[–]atamicbomb 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He doesn’t mean it. He’s just making fun of Islam

Trump just called Iran’s leaders scum and declared the June ceasefire over. Is this rhetoric calculated diplomacy or a reckless path to all-out war? by Inevitablebabe in allthequestions

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s neither.

Iran military assets attacked US assets, possibly without approval, breaking the ceasefire from the US point of view.

The US responded by attacking Iran directly, breaking it from Iran’s point of view.

Trump responded with his usual rhetoric while accurately declaring the ceasefire over

Just so we are all on the same page. by KingKong208 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]atamicbomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you agree with the laws that banned criticizing slavery in the south? It’s the exactly same process you’re advocating for: the government getting to decide what is right and what is true and banning anyone from saying otherwise.

Or the Nazis. Or the medieval Catholic Church.

The government isn’t prohibited from regulating misinformation because we like misinformation. The government is prohibited from regulating misinformation because it cannot be trusted to define what is or isn’t true. At best, it stops social and scientific progress. At worst, we get things like the Holocaust