Sunday, January 11, 2015

Debate, feminist style


Never bother with dialectic when dealing with a feminist. Their use of dialectic is only for superficial rhetorical purposes, and the veil is tissue-thin. Just go directly to rhetoric, flay them, roll them in salt, and then, if you happen to feel like it, address the nominally dialectical point for the sake of any third parties observing.

28 comments:

Earl Thomas said...

Agreed...just hit them with the truth. It's like light to a vampire.

cailcorishev said...

Vox, what might your rhetorical response have been? I'm thinking of something like, "Of course feminism is about men. They talk about nothing else, just 'Men Are Bad' all day long." Or: "If feminism were any more about men, it would need a basket to carry its balls around in."

I think those need work, but they're off the top of my head.

Trust said...

Most of the left, feminism included, excel at turnings discussion to slogans that no one disagrees with to provide cover for things totally different.

Vox said...

I would have started with "Why do you hate men?" You always want to get feminists defending themselves personally. Your responses are suboptimal because you are not addressing the feminist herself, you are addressing something else that is not-her.

Rhetoric is the art of addressing emotions and people's emotions primarily concern themselves. Solipsistic people's emotions ONLY concern themselves.

funkerblog said...

This is like the latest Dalrock piece where in the process of debating why women aren't hypergamous, the female commentator went on to demonstrate text book examples of female hypergamy. Its understandable though, because Feminists have no insight, not in to things generally, and especially not themselves. But its a class A fuck up when you set out to disprove A and in the process instead prove it. Intergalactic level stupid.

Earl Thomas said...

'You always want to get feminists defending themselves personally.'

Although I'd add it'll take a bit to get there...you address them personally at first and their modus operandi defense I notice is they fire back insults. Slip past the insults and see if you can pin them down to something.

Cataline Sergius said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe A. said...

I don't know... dialectic seems to be brutally exposing them for any observer involved.

Vox said...

I don't know... dialectic seems to be brutally exposing them for any observer involved.

True, but so what? Most dialectically capable people try to use dialectic even when they don't have an audience. Contra the advice of Aristotle.

Trust said...

Mine is just one family, but a good observation in light of the Dalrock reference.

I have two sisters. Between the two of them, there are three kids, three dads, four felony convictions and prison terms. It is worth noting that my dad was against all three relationships, and my mother supported the relationships... with my mom and sisters calling my dad a controlling ass for being less than supportive of his daughter's choices in unemployed thugs.

My one sister in particular was valediction of her senior class at a Christian high schools and immediately enrolled in bible school. Yet, within a year of leaving the nest she was pregnant by a criminal, ans ultimately landed in a shelter. Within a year of leavingbthr shelter, she was impregnated by another criminal.

The problem was always blamed in men. Dad was an ass for not supporting her. The father's were not stepping up. Better men didn't want the leftovers. Bad bad men were bad bad bad.

But say "you knew about their records, why weren't your standards higher?" And the cuss words fly.

Feminism is about detracting consequences from choices, responsibilities from outcome, and outcome from effort. For women anyway. And to point out the obvious that they can't argue with, they will lash out.

Cats.

Earl Thomas said...

But say "you knew about their records, why weren't your standards higher?" And the cuss words fly.

Like the sun to a vampire.

alphaisassumed said...

"You always want to get feminists defending themselves personally."

Which isn't all that difficult considering that they see everything through and entirely personal lens no matter what you do. A takeaway from a recent discussion with a feminist:

"No matter how hypothetical a discussion might be, to a woman it’s ultimately about her. Moreover, she’s likely to project that mindset onto others, assuming that her conversation partner isn’t arguing about a hypothetical either and instead making a point that matters especially to him."

I had a feminist scream at me lately and it was fun:

http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/anecdotal-evidence/

cailcorishev said...

You always want to get feminists defending themselves personally.

Good point, I'll have to remember that. I was too quick to jump to playing to the gallery with ridicule. More fun, but probably less effective without getting her to look silly first.

1sexistpig2another said...

I laughed out loud!!!

Daniel said...

Make a good movie though: Dawn of the Man Hate of Sour Grapes.

Hurry down, doomsday. The bugs are taking over.

Desiderius said...

Joe A.,

"I don't know... dialectic seems to be brutally exposing them for any observer involved."

No, the instinctive human reaction to a situation where one party is arguing in bad faith and the other is continuing in good faith (i.e. failing tit-for-tat) is that the latter is submitting to the dominance of the former. The "go fuck yourself" in the original post shows the typical feminist making sure everyone knows she isn't the submissive one.

"Most dialectically capable people try to use dialectic even when they don't have an audience. Contra the advice of Aristotle."

Exactly. You have to bring bad faith yourself - preferably in a playful, even-tempered manner - to show that you understand the game (amusement hinting at mastery) before any dialectic will occur. Premature good faith, like premature romance for a man/sex for a woman means you lose the game.

Brad Andrews said...

Did this lady nuke her Twitter account? I only see references to her, but Twitter can't find her. Unless she preemptively blocked me, which is dubious.

Mindstorm said...

Continuing the 'debate', what would you do after being called to make an anatomically impossible feat that she asked SurveyingEvil?

I would go with "Or what? You would bleed on me?" in Monty Pythonesque tradition, of course.

Doom said...

She looks and sounds a lot like my last. Never did have to go fuck myself. The trick with feminists is to give them all the rope they want, let them tie themselves up, then flip, find the wet spots, and give them what they have been demanding. Just saying.

I, personally, loved oppressing here with my... let's just call it my patriarchy. Then again, she did too. Sometimes I would "debate" to get her ready, sometimes it wasn't necessary. Most conversations were with me on autopilot. I knew what I wanted, what she needed, and how to thread that needle. They aren't debating, they are just looking for a little. Or better, a lot. There is no more such a thing as feminism than there is atheism. Just a lot of women who can't get it, or enough, and a bunch of guys who... actually... also can't get any, or enough. Like babies, you just check certain things when they cry, because it doesn't otherwise make sense. I'll leave atheists to... others... of the beautiful mind set. Bleh.

Vox said...

Continuing the 'debate', what would you do after being called to make an anatomically impossible feat that she asked SurveyingEvil?

Same thing. "Why do you hate men?"

Mindstorm said...

Sigh...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikssfUhAlgg

Mr.MantraMan said...

I think Xavi is off to a good start, after his intro he can now dominate the woman with rhetoric.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

To be fair, this style of debate is common among all types of liberals and conservatives, who quick to denounce anyone dissenting from received opinion as "racist," "anti-semitic," "sexist," etc.

Ron said...

@doom

Could you write an article on how that is done? I have an image in my mind of thousands of red pillers shagging screeching feminists into compliance.

John Rampton said...

Sometimes, you really have to admire a feminist's driven self bias. It takes a real sense of entitlement to expect to be taken seriously by all and sundry when you're pushing a conspiracy theory like The Patriarchy.

xandohsa said...

That exchange is a variation of the familiar old, "How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?" joke. But still, I laughed out loud. Hard!

Eric said...

For some reason every time I check this site the above exchange give me a big belly laugh. It's just so representative of feminism.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.