This Whole Thing Reminds Me Of Racism And Discrimination

[CaptainForehead]

@karankaran do you cook at home? What I have noticed with Indians and Nepalis is that their clothes smell of spices and food. This may drive those away who are not accustomed to the smell. You may not notice it because you are used to it but others do. Even I notice it because I pretty much never cook food so I am not accustomed to the smell. Sometimes the smell is so strong that you can sense it even if you are a few feet away from an individual.

It could also be that @karankaran smells so delicious that his colleagues are afraid they might bite him, which would get them fired.

 

[rclark]

Because we're on the same boat, and he's our Captain. Good sailors follow their Captain. @WhitePolarBear @CaptainForehead

Part of the ship. Part of the crew.

The hair loss ship! That's going down faster than the TITANIC!

 

[CaptainForehead]

@WhitePolarBear @CaptainForehead @Dante92

I'm just curious why does it take all 3 of you to go at @samantha3333 ?

@CaptainForehead can defend himself fine if he felt slighted.

I think you make him look 'weak' as if he cant follow up with Sam on his own--which he did.

It would have made me look weak, were the opponent someone of stature.
This is explained in the bro-handbook.

As a side note I do notice @CaptainForehead has a habit of correcting peoples grammar and spelling---I don't think he means it to be offensive--BUT having been on the receiving end of it early on, I misjudged him when he first did it to me that he was being a 'jerk' to me for no real reason.
So Captain I would be mindful of it, that it comes off very obnoxious.
If you don't care--then you don't care but if you are feeling like Samantha is going at you for no real reason--I know from experience I had felt you were being passive aggressive to me also when you would critique my spelling/grammar.

I pay attention to writing. I try to complement when people write well. The flip side of this is that I notice when people are being sloppy. In this particular case, Samantha claimed she spoke "perfect" English, invoked racism, and then proceeded with error-filled text. We could not let this slide by.

On the jumping of others: I suspect there are two reasons. One, Samantha has a habit of coming on this men's subforum, not being able to handle criticism, and dishing out dislikes.
Two, both @Dante92 and @WhitePolarBear (and I'm sure many others) are invested in improving their English and writing skills. While it might appear that we come on this forum just to vent about women, in actuality some of us also use the forum for writing practice (to get better professionally or personally), for practicing humor, sometimes debating; in general for bettering ourselves. Two birds with one stone.

I mean, the discussion that goes on here usually goes along 7 or 8 standard lines. There needs to be something more to make it worthwhile for regular posters to keep coming back -- there are some very bright and industrious people here with goals related to personal development. One does not get a job like Fred's, an internship in another country, or get selected for a fellowship out of 100s, without these traits.


PS: I would appreciate it if mistakes in my writing were pointed out.
Also, I openly admit that I write much better than I speak. Even there, I actually have to go over the text several times before I post.

 

[Exodus2011]

It's not an article it's an 'op-ed' and a stupid one, like fictional essay of 'what if'. Like a wet-dream fantasy of some pissed off feminist and you are giving it way too much attention and fear mongering.

It's not voting rights she is saying 'franchise' i have no idea what that even means.

Just looked it up she is talking about 'franchising' In South Africa...I am going to assume her appraroch is to deny 'franchise' opportunities to white males as a way to 'boost' the opportunities for people who were suppressed...Not really a rational appraoch--but I am curious how you read a stupid Op Ed and get scared of white men actually losing the right to vote? as if that was a research article of some legislation or movement?

its just the fact that it exists and was published on top of it. rad fems are horrible

 

[hairblues]

It would have made me look weak, were the opponent someone of stature.
This is explained in the bro-handbook.




I pay attention to writing. I try to complement when people write well. The flip side of this is that I notice when people are being sloppy. In this particular case, Samantha claimed she spoke "perfect" English, invoked racism, and then proceeded with error-filled text. We could not let this slide by.

On the jumping of others: I suspect there are two reasons. One, Samantha has a habit of coming on this men's subforum, not being able to handle criticism, and dishing out dislikes.
Two, both @Dante92 and @WhitePolarBear (and I'm sure many others) are invested in improving their English and writing skills. While it might appear that we come on this forum just to vent about women, in actuality some of us also use the forum for writing practice (to get better professionally or personally), for practicing humor, sometimes debating; in general for bettering ourselves. Two birds with one stone.

I mean, the discussion that goes on here usually goes along 7 or 8 standard lines. There needs to be something more to make it worthwhile for regular posters to keep coming back -- there are some very bright and industrious people here with goals related to personal development. One does not get a job like Fred's, an internship in another country, or get selected for a fellowship out of 100s, without these traits.


PS: I would appreciate it if mistakes in my writing were pointed out.
Also, I openly admit that I write much better than I speak. Even there, I actually have to go over the text several times before I post.

I think you are over compensating with this long explanation to justify them going at her.

They simply don't like her and they used you as an excuse to go at her.

And having been on the receiving end of your somewhat snide comments early on in my postings about my grammar bugging you/corrections--(something you admitted to me later had more to do with you OCD then trying to aid people in learning English)---usually in the midst of having Dante and WPB coming at me hard and debating heavy issues---it did seem very passive aggressive at the time and kind of silly to me personally.

If you guys don't care then you don't care. I am just sharing with you the perspective having been on the receiving end before getting to know any of you here. You can literally have 5 or 6 posters piling on relentlessly when you are new here and a lot of it is heavy in gender issues. I am not a particular fan of most of Samantha's posts to be 100% honest. I just don't think it takes 3 of you to go at her about her grammar or her attitude at having received 'notes' on her grammar.
She comes here because she has hair loss which is isolating.

 

[hairblues]

its just the fact that it exists and was published on top of it. rad fems are horrible

Agreed, its on par with Milos bullshit about women published on Breitbardt

 

[CaptainForehead]

I just don't think it takes 3 of you to go at her about her grammar

Three of us went at her about her grammar?

You can literally have 5 or 6 posters piling on relentlessly when you are new here and a lot of it is heavy in gender issues.

Really? You're playing the gender card? I thought you were better than this.

Guys receive exponentially more flak than women here. Like that guy who claimed he slept with 2000 virgins. He was relentlessly mocked. You were one of the mockers. Or the fat man who refused to acknowledge he was fat.

But Samantha -- she insults me on a male subsection of the forum, two other people object, and suddenly we're piling on her based on her gender? Come on.

"I am woman, hear me roar. But I'm also a girl so please be gentle."

 

[Exodus2011]

Agreed, its on par with Milos bullshit about women published on Breitbardt

I havent read that but milo is branded while this sh*t isnt. That kind of hypocrisy is annoying

 

[hairblues]

Three of us went at her about her grammar?




Really? You're playing the gender card? I thought you were better than this.

Guys receive exponentially more flak than women here. Like that guy who claimed he slept with 2000 virgins. He was relentlessly mocked. You were one of the mockers. Or the fat man who refused to acknowledge he was fat.

But Samantha -- she insults me on a male subsection of the forum, two other people object, and suddenly we're piling on her based on her gender? Come on.

"I am woman, hear me roar. But I'm also a girl so please be gentle."

I'm not playing the 'gender card'. THEY do YOU do..that's the point.

But nice try twisting what I wrote.

 

[hairblues]

I havent read that but milo is branded while this sh*t isnt. That kind of hypocrisy is annoying

Right but Milo is a household name this girl is a random no one who as far as I know is not invited to college campus tours by Young Republican Clubs or featured on Bill Maher or Joe Rogan.
You are correct the hypocrisy is very annoying.

 

[hairblues]

That's always the hardest part from my interactions with non native speakers. When it comes to speaking, I notice the accent is off. The intonations, the choice of words, the speed of language, overly polite or inappropriately questioning. It's part and parcel. You can tell in an instant if they are foreign. Having said that, I've seen some people that have "neutralised" all this to a large extent and although still appear non native (as expected), their speech is very good. I think you can be one of those Capt.

Also a lot of foreigners actually have better grammar than natives. Natives forget the rules and also learnt to speak before they wrote. And local English is so "rich" in a bad way, it's clear why that can pass onto written language when you speak completely differently. One example is some natives will write "should of" and not "should have." Purely because they sound the same almost when spoken locally.

Nothing like being lost in a book though - so many beautiful words to describe a scenario. Sure it's the same in other languages too though.

I am actually a writer. I write a lot of fiction--mostly as a creative hobby. It's a compulsive hobby I have done since I am in grade school. It's not something I really want to discuss here so I am quiet about it for the most part.

And when I personally post on this forum I write as if I am 'speaking' to someone or how I am thinking in the moment in an honest response to what someone wrote as if it's a conversation.
I am not 'self-editing' as I go, although sometimes I do go back and fix some minor mis-types.
Personally I always felt to 'self edit' as you 'write' breaks up the flow of thought.
And to go over something before posting--it then stops being a 'real' spontaneous conversation.
It is a loss of authenticity. We start to self censor as we self edit.

I had hoped people are doing the same thing. That people are editing and watering down their posts to find the 'perfect' post is a little disappointing to me.

If its all 'polish', then yes--sometimes makes it easier to read.
But it also loses authenticity of someones character and where they come from and how they 'think' as opposed to how they 'write' an essay or editorial opinion piece.
I mean occasionally this is great but not what I personally like about the forum.

Substance of what people are actually 'saying'/thinking uncensored is more interesting to me then the 'style' in which they say it.

 

[hairblues]

@Exodus2011

In case you are curious what Breirbart news published--Steve Bannon is in the white house as an advisor to the President an office in the West Wing..I mean if you 'think' about it, you may understand why so many women marched with pink hats that day.

http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/...-worst-inventions-in-the-history-of-humanity/


here is Breitbart' viewership
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journa...ews-received-200-million-pageviews-september/

Im pretty sure Breitbart has much more viewership than Huffington post

http://vesselnews.io/one-chart-tells-left-wing-media-dead/

Caps!

I don't understand..you have a problem with your teeth?

 

[hairblues]

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Feminists marching in these pink "pussy hats". Infinitely ridiculous.

Professional victims.

A lot of those "victims" have upper-middle class incomes, good health, good looks, and university degrees.

Don't get me wrong, there are significant, genuine problems with the Trump administration. However a lot of the people protesting would be enthusiastic if Clinton had won and was now implementing the same policies. For example, they had no problem when Obama restricted migrants flows from Muslim countries. We never heard a peep from them when Obama did it.

As another example, you may remember George W Bush being castigated as a warmonger. Are you old enough to remember that? Well, Obama fought more wars and used more weapons, and there were never 1,000,000 people marching. No, they gave him the Nobel Peace prize instead.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I am actually a writer. I write a lot of fiction--mostly as a creative hobby. It's a compulsive hobby I have done since I am in grade school. It's not something I really want to discuss here so I am quiet about it for the most part.

And when I personally post on this forum I write as if I am 'speaking' to someone or how I am thinking in the moment in an honest response to what someone wrote as if it's a conversation.
I am not 'self-editing' as I go, although sometimes I do go back and fix some minor mis-types.
Personally I always felt to 'self edit' as you 'write' breaks up the flow of thought.
And to go over something before posting--it then stops being a 'real' spontaneous conversation.
It is a loss of authenticity. We start to self censor as we self edit.

I had hoped people are doing the same thing. That people are editing and watering down their posts to find the 'perfect' post is a little disappointing to me.

If its all 'polish', then yes--sometimes makes it easier to read.
But it also loses authenticity of someones character and where they come from and how they 'think' as opposed to how they 'write' an essay or editorial opinion piece.
I mean occasionally this is great but not what I personally like about the forum.

Substance of what people are actually 'saying'/thinking uncensored is more interesting to me then the 'style' in which they say it.

There's any number of reasons for people to have different writing styles.

I often worry that this forum and others like it makes me a less effective writer.

I disagree that the stream of consciousness is best. I think lucid writing is best.

 

[hairblues]

There's any number of reasons for people to have different writing styles.

I often worry that this forum and others like it makes me a less effective writer.

I disagree that the stream of consciousness is best. I think lucid writing is best.

Thats because you are looking to have logical debates

I'm looking to hear peoples 'character' and uncensored thoughts.

 

[hairblues]

Feminists marching in these pink "pussy hats". Infinitely ridiculous.

Professional victims.

Not really, it's mostly women who are appalled a man who bragged about grabbing young attractive women by the pussy and is able to get away with it because of his fame--then was elected to highest office in the country even perhaps the world.

Are some professional victims? sure
Personally I am not a fan of the woman who organized it.

Are all or even most of them professional victims? not really

Add to that someone like Steve Bannon being 'allowed' into the white house.

I mean can we imagine if HRC was heard on tape talking clearly with Kelly Rippa about grabbing young mens genitals--and being able to get away with it because shes famous?
Would we just say 'thats just locker talk' and dismiss it.
Add to that her having Rachel Maddow or Ariann Huffington as her chief advisor
Now add to that her Son in Law being in her administration
Then add to that her daughter working for her in WH.

Lets get real now.

 

[hairblues]

A lot of those "victims" have upper-middle class incomes, good health, good looks, and university degrees.

Don't get me wrong, there are significant, genuine problems with the Trump administration. However a lot of the people protesting would be enthusiastic if Clinton had won and was now implementing the same policies. For example, they had no problem when Obama restricted migrants flows from Muslim countries. We never heard a peep from them when Obama did it.

As another example, you may remember George W Bush being castigated as a warmonger. Are you old enough to remember that? Well, Obama fought more wars and used more weapons, and there were never 1,000,000 people marching. No, they gave him the Nobel Peace prize instead.

They did not protest his foreign policies.

I doubt many of them are even aware of his foreign policies. They are protesting his domestic policies--which are extremely different then HRC on every level. Most voters, most Americans don't pay attention to foreign policy its too 'far off' and we don't actually feel it consciously to make a strong connection to it.
I think Europe feels our foreign policy more directly then we actually do.

They protested his grabbing women by the genitals and the bragging about getting away with it to another man on tape--all due to his fame.

I don't believe people have protested foreign policy in this country in any real meaningful significant manner or numbers /droves since the Vietnam War. It's all domestic. I am surprised you don't know this.

The muslim ban people were mostly upset about because it was a violation of the constitution which in a way is even 'domestic' policy for constitutionalists. That was my main beef with it. It was written and presented, rolled out as if he has no checks and balances as an absolute power and he does not and I was glad to see him put in check by the courts. I don't really have a very strong opinion on the issue of a actual policy of having a '90 day ban'--it was the wording of it and the execution of it that as an American it offended me. And it also demonstrated clearly to me the ineptness of both him and the people he keeps closest to him advising him and their lack of knowledge--(or perhaps disdain)--of the fabric of this country being a democracy and that Presidents do NOT have and should never have absolute power or authority.

But lets keep it real and focused---the people who are the most relentless and effective in protest their beef is Health Care.

The woman's march was just raw emotion. Like a global 'scream' of denial. Not something I was a part of because 'meh' personally does not effect me I only felt oppressed once in my life and I succeeded and he is 'teaching' so meh.
But I think 20 year old women 'woke up' to reality. All these women who were like "Oh I am not a feminist I like nail polish and boys"--Uhm okay. Now they are self-identifying as feminists because they got a sniff of reality. Unfortunately for men the campus feminist are mostly very extreme as if fighting a 'war'...Hopefully they will move a bit more center with it...but I would not feel glib or satisfied if I were a man to have Trump as President--as if it proved something to surpassed men everywhere as validation--all it did was piss off young women who were asleep and had no idea that many men really think so little of them.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

They did not protest his foreign policies.

I doubt many of them are even aware of his foreign policies. The are protesting his domestic polcies--which are extremely different then HRC. Most voters don't pay attention to foreign policy.

They protested his grabbing women by the genitals and the bragging about getting away with it to another man on tape--all due to his fame.

Nope. All of those people were already angry prior to the tape. Those same people were largely ok with Paula Jones, gennifer flowers, etc.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Thats because you are looking to have logical debates

I'm looking to hear peoples 'character' and uncensored thoughts.

Reason and emotion tend to harmoniously support each other in nature and stable people. It's why we've evolved have both. It's also demonstrated by modern neuroscience. People with impaired emotions have a harder time making rational decisions.

I want to see the full package of people, not a subcomponent that doesn't even exist.