What are /r/TiADiscussion's favorite Products & Services?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

As I see it, the problem is one of escalation. Words are words, until someone tries to assail someone's ability to eat, to feed their family, etc. At that point it's a direct assault on someone's life.

Frankly, I'm astonished noone's ended up dead from this. Let's take this scenario - the SJWs attack someone who isn't a "soft target" and is an actual inveterate racist or sexist or some other -ist and has actual genuine hatred running or actual genuine existential fear because of those s/he considers enemy... then, out of the blue because of some comments made on a facebook page, the enemy strikes. Suddenly unemployed, out of options and with EVERY presumption verified in dramatic fashion, what else is left but all out war for retribution and survival?

These people really need to read Sun Tzu's The Art of War, specifically the part about leaving an enemy a route of escape. When you cut off someone's options entirely, they'll fight with the desperation and ferocity of a cornered animal.

Maybe that's what they're after?

>Anita makes some perfectly reasonable, honest points. She's just an activist in a way I'm not, so she's generally not doing the "one one hand, but on the other hand" thing. She's trying to drive a discussion, and while I understand what she's trying to do, it's not my bag, baby.

"Drive a discussion"? If, by that, you mean 'shut down any comment sections that might question her and refuse to engage in legitimate academic debate', sure, I guess.

I don't get all the personal hatred for the Feminist Frequency team that some people seem to have, but they're academically bankrupt and deeply intellectually dishonest. I genuinely recommend you have a look at this series of articles, which attempt to engage and critique the show on an academic, rather than personal, level.

It's just a particular kind of dialect that developed online instead of in a geographic location. It's pretty interesting, and people discuss it a lot.

Yeah, crazy SJWs will always try to find something to be offended about even in this good news. But the rest of Tumblr seems really positive towards this.

Tumblr's trending topics full of positivity towards the news. https://www.tumblr.com/explore/trending

And I have found a lot of happy fan arts of gay characters ship regarding to this current topic.

I don't even know what the drama is exactly but ok, by that logic let's look at 4chan's rules. https://www.4chan.org/rules #4 states that any raid is not allowed, and if I remember correctly results in a 2 week ban from the site. Not just the board, but the entire site.

4chan is also not a single body, for every /b/tard choking on their own spit you can find another person discussing how everyone else is a plebian co/ck/ that doesn't know shit about cooking, someone masturbating furiously over their bunny weapon stoc/k/pile, arguing about if /vp/oreons should adhere to smogon or just play what they like, whether elf slave girls could sex appeal a fa/tg/uy out of his slaaneshi pleasure dome, or weaboos discussing if their w/a/ifu is truly his only love or not.

A "Small portion" of tumblr is SJWs and an even smaller portion of that possibly participated in a raid on 4chan. They (I'm assuming) went to /b/ and tried... something retarded, and then of the /b/tards that saw that thread, a small number discussed whether or not to counter-raid. And then an even smaller number actually took part. Keep in mind anyone actually posting relating to this raid would've been banned and they're aware of it.

Compare that to tumblr's rules http://www.tumblr.com/policy/en/community

And then look at all the sexism, racism, classism, and whatever other "-ism"s that are allowed to stay on the site. Not just the feminists. The neonazis, the redpillers, the white supremacists, black supremacists, Japanese supremacists (thisisnotjapanese or whatever they're called).

Tumblr didn't awaken a sleeping dragon. A small majority poked a stick at the ocean of piss and got splashed by a small majority of the most brain damaged individuals that can still read and write. And you're defending one side instead of simply enjoying the smell.

See Steven Pinker who coined the term "euphemism treadmill" in his book "The Blank Slate": > People invent new words for emotionally charged referents, but soon the euphemism becomes tainted by association, and a new word must be found, which soon acquires its own connotations, and so on ... Names for minorities will continue to change as long as people have negative attitudes towards them.

And of course, if you're in a different area the currently preferred term for a group might be somewhat different.

Gamers want to be considered "cultured" for playing video games?

Maybe he just wants to turn videogames into the same tedious grind he had to experience to get his English degree. "Oh, you want to call videogames 'art'? Well, my idea of art means slogging through chapter after chapter learning about 19th century whaling, you uncouth savages!"

GTA5 should totally be considered on par with Dostoyevsky.

oh gods haha I've been very vocal about my distaste for Tumblr SJWs/genderspecial/blind cishet hate/etc and it's given me quite the reputation. So much so, that I had to make a separate drama blog and an entire tag called otherdrama was coined pretty much to talk about how shitty I am lmfao (although, luckily the drama was cleared for the most part just recently!~)

Not sure if ED would ever take notice of me, since I'm just kinda infamous for being more rational than the general Tumblr community? But I'm pretty well known throughout the otherkin community either for good or drama so maybe haha

This book is pretty highly cited and it does exactly that, survey convicted rapists, and it comes to the conclusion that power is usually the motive for rape. Unfortunately, a lot of the book isn't available, but the pages of male-on-male rape make a pretty convincing case about rape really being about power.

Still, I dunno if that's really "proof" - just evidence, and I'm pretty sure that's all that's possible in this case.

Yes, you could make that assertion without any evidence. I'm guessing you've never read a gender studies text that uses empirical inquiry? Perhaps, you could argue, this is the reason why people get defensive when other automatically assume they are dumb or crazy for deciding to study gender studies.

> I'd also like to know if you have any evidence that women's studies has been put through the ringer of any real academic criticism and come out the other side.

What, you mean besides the system of peer review that all texts are subject to? Yes, also real academic criticism.

> At the school I went to, it was essentially allowed to exist outside the other humanities programs, presumably to keep the sort of people who would gravitate towards it from polluting philosophy and political science disciplines quite so much.

Can you provide a source?

Patriarchy is defined as, "A system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it." Let's look at the US:

• Women can vote of their own volition, without the need to ask their husbands. Hell, they make up the majority of voters.

• Women can also be the breadwinners of their families. Point two.

• Women can hold any position of legal, political, or academic authority, and they do.

• There are a huge variety of public and private programs exclusively for women, such as women-only scholarships, gender quotas in school and employment, and women-only public services like in transport (at least here up north, that is).

• Men make up an overwhelming majority of not-so-flattering statistics, such as higher suicide rates, homeless, incarcerated, workplace deaths, and they make a smaller number in such things as enrollment in highschool and postsecondary, and (slowly but surely) high-tier jobs. Those last 2 statistics are where women hold the majority. When women made up the minority of those last 2, people went up in arms and demanded change. Now that men lag behind, where's the Patriarchy to put them over women?

And this doesn't even scratch the surface. Women have all the legal rights to that of men, plus more (i.e. men don't have reproductive "rights", last I checked). We keep hearing cries and screams about "War on Women" over and over, yet no one ever talks about the problems men face in society alongside women; and when they do it's only in the context of women and their issues, not men.

So basically, no, the US isn't a Patriarchy.

Here's what comes up on the tag "lifting haul." I thought it was just troll accounts at first, but there are so many and they're so specific that after a while you're like...okay that's a real thing...

That difference in delivery system though is what causes crack to be profoundly more addictive and harmful, coke on the other hand in moderation isn't nearly as harmful as many believe.

Good points, except for a couple.

> An over reliance on tropes isn't sexism it's just shitty writing.

If they're sexist tropes (which, in vidyagames is often the case) it's still sexism. Unlike the Tumblerites, I don't think telling people to kill themselves is the solution, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

> [S]ome people view her as a scammer for asking for donations and not doing what she promised.

This I'll have too look into more, but I pledged to a Kickstarter last Christmas and have yet to see anything from it. Sometimes it just comes down to a long time frame to actualize what was promised in the Kickstarter (for reference the project that I am talking about was the Pathfinder Online Kickstarter, haven't seen anything from it except the PDF's).

Furthermore, the first video in the series funded by the Kickstarter was actually released on March 7th last year, so I can't see much legitimacy there.

I guess I just see her being lumped in with all the Tumblerites as being less and antiSJW and more anti-social justice. Just because there's a bunch of morons acting exactly opposite of what their supposed ideals entail doesn't mean that these problems (sexism, racism, homo-and trans- phobia) don't exist. That's kind of like saying that, since the Soviet Union failed, we shouldn't bother to address income inequality at all, since it's already been tried. By the same token, just because the SJW crowd is a bunch of shitheads doesn't mean these issues should be ignored, if anything people like us need to handle these issues reasonably, with tact and compassion, to show the shithead SJW's how wrong, ineffective, and damaging they actually are.

EDIT: Otherkin are still fucking retarded, though.

Yes it's true. For $100 you can get that information from 23andme; they make a chart that looks like this:

• https://23andme.https.internapcdn.net/res/img/public/sections/unique_you/UXC8XSKtrIX5LWrMIIJB5g_AncestryComposition_Illustration.png

Here is a quote from their marketing material:

"Find out what percent of your DNA comes from populations around the world, ranging from East Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, and more. Break European ancestry down into distinct regions such as the British Isles, Scandinavia and Italy. People with mixed ancestry, African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans will also get a detailed breakdown."

Source: https://www.23andme.com/ancestry/

"You can never be too rich or too thin." -- Wallis, Duchess of Windsor

Of course, I've seen no proof that this is cultural. Thinness has some value as a proxy signal for youth, so a preference for thinner women probably has at least a partial biological basis. (Of course, such a preference could go too far, such that it's unhealthy.)

Honestly, everyone wants two things: [1] Sex (more specifically a natural instict to reproduce, there's tons of evidence so I'll just throw some general article here) and [2] Validation (basically; attention. People want to know that there are things [other people, animals, gods, anything] that care, think, and talk about them, some people want others to hate them, but most people want others to simply KNOW them).

This kinda led me to realize the root of the whole Social Justice outbreak: People just post things on social media because it is the easiest way to know that other people are giving you attention (I'm guilty of this). The more controversial and relevant you're post, the more attention you get. Next thing you know, you're famous for blogging on tumblr and you realize all these people agree with you and you're opinions, and it feels good. It becomes part of their personality and imagine if someone came along and told you that you're absolutely wrong. It would suck, most people - even me, can't take that.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, it's difficult to admit you're wrong for everyone, even the OP is just posting some random bs here because he thinks everyone in this sub will agree with him. It's not wrong to want validation from others, we're social creatures. It's just that there is no end to this whole social justice thing. It can never end because everyone is different, and social media makes it so easy for everyone's opinions to be instantly validated - and no one can be wrong because as long as there are people that agree with them, they will always keep arguing.

Dictionaries define the language as it is used by the majority of the population, and update to include new words that did not exist before. Linguistics 101, homie.

>It cannot.

Why?

>If it did, philosophers would've abandoned labeling appeals to personal experience logical fallacies a long time ago.

That's hilarious, considering "logical fallacies" can be a weak Bayesian evidence.

> Even in lower education women are given several times the opportunity of men to go into STEM oriented interests. Many camps tailored towards things like aerospace, computers, or engineering give girls reduced or waived fees. If women are still the primary caretakers for their children then that's where they're getting these ideas from, not educational institutions.

Hell there is a bigger percentage of females studying STEM in India than Norway.

interesting video on Norway!

*finally formatted link right...

It reminds me of realism as a theory of international relations. It's not necessarily the most realistic theory just because one group of scholars shotgunned the term "realism."

In both cases, I don't really care, and I don't think it's possible to change at this point.

Also, if you do enjoy pressuring your peer group to use "less prejudicial" language, you might enjoy this site.

> In the past three years, Metafilter[1] , once one of my favorite sites, has become increasingly insufferable and "social justicy", for lack of a better phrase. Metafilter still has some decent discussion, and there's still a lot of front page posts (FPPs) with links to fascinating Web sites I never would have otherwise discovered. However, every fourth or fifth front page post is about some gender or gender identity-related issue[2] . They're usually framed in a "them against us" context, more about outrage and inciting guilt. Those FPPs threads usually have the most posting activity, and posts that agree with the article's sentiment get the most "favorites".

Metafilter has been terrible ever since Mutant stopped posting frequently. I agree that sentiment on the board has changed over the last 5 years. For example, this post would never have appeared 5 years ago.

I think I stopped reading after their discussion of the London riots in 2011.

There are two great books from Matthew McKay, Self-Esteem (https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/1626253935/ref=sr_1_2?__mk_de_DE=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&crid=1N9OM5EDWRXSA ) which is an introduction of applied CBT for Self-Esteem issues and "Thought and Feelings" which is more advanced and a lot more work (but still good) https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/1684035481/ref=sr_1_2?qid=1649752006

Thanks for posting this, its a nice find.

As for the article, there is a huge difference between this guy and things like the League of Legends kid or Tumblrites saying "Die Cis Scum."

This guy made repeated, violent threats against Law Enforcement, his ex-wife, and his ex-employer. Also, not saying it should be illegal, but its probably not a good idea to post violent fantasies about a specific FBI agent after they visit you and tell you to stop posting violent fantasies about real people.

Compare that to the LoL kid, who said something stupid and violent for shock value, or Tumblrites who don't have anyone in mind when they say stuff like that (or if they do, show absolutely no intention of actually carrying it out.)

I hope they rule in his favor (or at least rule that a threat like this needs a specific, realistic target,) in the interest of free speech, but this guy inspires very little sympathy, and needs professional help.

Either way this goes, it'll be a fun few days on TiA, either with Tumblrites scrambling to say that they're different, or bitching about how the courts let down victims.

> You're talking out of both sides of your mouth by claiming there's not enough data and then claiming the data can be prove your assertion.

You keep putting words in my mouth. I never made such an assertion. I've said "the data are inconclusive, but seem to suggest...". The two clauses in that sentence do not conflict as you suppose.

> The study I linked above has been one of the very few that even looked at the topic using empirical data.

Thanks for the link. I'll give it a read. Here's another paper that looks at the subject (assuming "the subject" is criminal justice generally and not stops specifically) from an empirical perspective:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256079484_No_evidence_of_racial_discrimination_in_criminal_justice_processing_Results_from_the_National_Longitudinal_Study_of_Adolescent_Health

Oh. Oh fuck you for giving an incredibly insightful and reasoned response.

I would counter that the fear of the "gamer" tribe is not entirely unfounded considering the August hit-pieces against the culture. Fearing that a group of people is trying to break apart a chunk of your identity is different than being insecure about a future that "includes more people than some folks are comfortable with".

Additionally, I think you're seriously underestimating the enmity a reasonable chunk of the gaming community has for its press. Anger at how terrible the review process is has been ongoing for several years now. The move towards greater "indie" popularity was seen as being a possible fix for big-studio influence on gaming journalism.

The other part, as you say, is identity politics. It's a common part of the outsider story to lose a friend or member of one's close circle to a woman who isn't that great of a person - but the friend/etc cannot see that because they are getting sex from her. I mean, it's a trope, but it's a trope for a reason. So, in the environment post-ZoePost, people saw Member of Tribe + Bad Person + Sex and the outrage engines dumped everything they had. Summing up that tempest with the word "misogyny" is inaccurate.

If you haven't read any Scott Alexander or Meredith Patterson yet, let me direct you to I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup by Alexander and When Nerds Collide by Patterson. They are both very insightful articles on the identity politics clash in effect.

It was more than saying mean things:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/15/anita-sarkeesian-feminist-games-critic-cancels-talk

I don't think anyone has experienced something on this level in recent years other than Trump or Sanders or Clinton. And let's face it, these three are running to be president and Sarkisian is talking about a product. It is as ridiculous to me as people attacking a youtuber because he didn't like the taste of flavored yogurt.

Also, do you need a "trigger warning" before talking about Sarkisian? She released those videos about three years ago and any mention of her of defending her rights as a human being apparently gives you PTSD.

Yeah sure, it's very meaty, but I think it's an essential thing for people to encounter if they want to know the broader scope of feminism. I think a lot of the problems about people thinking feminism is dumb fascist ideology is that they have never encountered the really heavy texts, and don't get the massive intellectual history and scope feminism carries. But you're right, bell hooks is definitely an easier way to get into feminism! Personally, Judith Butler broke down a lot of barriers for me due to problems I had with aspects second wave feminists, and bell hooks provided the basis for how I came to understand how to put feminism into practice in daily life and all.

Re the gender thing, gender is by definition socially constructed (gender vs. sex etc.), but gender identity (i.e. act of and degree of identification with gender roles) can differ from the assigned sex at birth, leading to dysphoria etc. Gender identity having a neurological basis does not inherently preclude gender being a social, performative act.

Tangentially related to that, Butler kind of discusses that in talking about David Reimer in Undoing Gender, and I think it's a pretty good critical dissection of assumptions projected onto that case, in that her real strength comes out - thinking much more critically about leaps of judgement we're quick to make about gender.

> I've seen the term thrown around in relation to SJW ideology, but I'm not really sure what it is.

In my experience, at least on Reddit, it's mostly a dumb buzzword thrown at disfavoured intellectuals and people who have taken Media Studies 101.

Here is an Encyclopedia Britannica article on it. I'll quote the first paragraph:

Postmodernism, also spelled post-modernism, in Western philosophy, a late 20th-century movement characterized by broad skepticism, subjectivism, or relativism; a general suspicion of reason; and an acute sensitivity to the role of ideology in asserting and maintaining political and economic power.

And a more detailed Stanford link (it's quite long).

Whoops so it is! I'm sorry, I think I just skipped over the last sentence. You're completely right.

As to private tumblr blogs, I did a quick search and found a link which may reveal WHY tumblr users say so many things of of a private nature in such a public setting: because your first+main tumblr blog HAS TO BE PUBLIC.

If you want a private tumblr blog, you need to first make a PUBLIC tumblr blog (your main), and then in a special drop-down setting, choose to make a SECOND tumblr blog that is password protected. You can then share the password with your friends. Obviously, this is (1) way too tedious, and (2) limits the audience of the blog when let's be honest, I bet a lot of the incentive for writing a post is to generate as many reblogs as possible ("yay new high score!!"), not actually communicate with your fellows and work out issues.

The Alexa page suggests that Tumblr is far more female than the general Internet population:

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/tumblr.com

Because I don't have a premium account there, I don't know their ages, but the fact that a huge amount browses from school, and the fact that so many are either in the no college or some college bracket suggests that they're quite young. But your source didn't really disagree with the claim about age, so that's probably beside the point.

Buzzfeed shows similar data, but matches up with facebook users a bit more (with respect to age).

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/buzzfeed.com

They may have pulled the info out of their ass (or made an educated guess), but it seems to be largely correct.

The idea of patriarchy is pretty innocuous. It really starts with John Stuart Mill 1869 with The Subjection of Women. He argues (pretty convincingly) that woman are being subjected by the government and by customs in society.

From there it develops through the Benthamite/Utilitarian tradition as a word that just means any social structure which is governed by a father-figure or by a group of father figures.

"patriarkhēs" was a ruling father and the word developed from there. From the early sixteenth century it was used when talking about the church and about God.

From the 1960s it's grown with its increasingly radical application to society.

As radical feminism is currently dying out its popularity in recent years has abated somewhat.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=patriarchy https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=7&case_insensitive=on&content=patriarchy&direct_url=t4%3B%2Cpatriarchy%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bpatriarchy%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BPatriarchy%3B%2Cc0%...

Sorry, found a new source that deserves its own mention. This article really talks about how the division of male vs female labor began in the 1800s. I'm sure push comes to shove, women did do slightly more work with kids -- I mean a man nursing would be difficult-- but it wasn't a definite line like it is today.

It seems to me like gender roles were 100% practicality all the time up until very recently.

Sure, here are the links

http://www.metafilter.com/132264/Baa-baa-black-sheep-have-you-any-wool-yes-sir-yes-sir-kill-all-men

http://metatalk.metafilter.com/22915/Baa-baa-bah

And yes, I was on metafilter once - I don't deny it. I can't stand by anything I've posted there since its been so heavily edited by those piece-of-shit mods that it totally misrepresents my views. How is that in any way relevant to what I said?

Also, I find it very telling how when people on metafilter say an inappropriate joke about women, it's deeply offensive, but when the joke is about killing men, you hand-wave it away as "satire."

Well, there was the fact that he said that he was worried about a Federal judge being biased because he was Mexican. You know, the one I mentioned upthread? The one from fucking INDIANA? Calling a judge biased based on his apparent race is... racist! My source is... Donald Trump, who said that shit himself on camera.

Also, upthread, was mention of the Department of Justice going after the property management company that Trump ran twice for racist practices related to black applicants. Discriminating against people based on race in terms of whether or not you will rent to them is... racist! If you need a source on that, there's google.

The, the book written by the former president of his casino. Trumped!: The Inside Story of the Real Donald Trump-His Cunning Rise and Spectacular Fall. I wish I had an affiliate link. The statement was "Besides that, I've got to tell you something else. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It's not anything they can control.... Don't you agree?" Do I really have to point out what this is an example of?

So yeah, the guys is what we in the field like to call "really fucking racist", probably just shy of "don't mention blacks around Uncle Ted even if he's sober"-racist. These facts weren't hidden away or never mentioned. I didn't really go hunting for them or engage in anything a junior high English teacher would call research. It's all fairly common knowledge.

Tell me, is any of this really a surprise to you?

Edit: And you edited a bunch of crap into your post. Whatever.

Uh, yeah, decent masochist here.

>"I don't want to know, surprise me."

Thats a challenge, that's always bad. especially since things like this exist :P http://www.amazon.com/Ben-Jerrys-Euphori-Lock-Combination-Protector/dp/B00ENRK812

For me it was the book The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility where I first became acquainted with this.

I really loathe the Faux News channel, but when this story broke I tried to investigate some of what this class was about. I found the textbooks online. One of them, called the Everyday Language of White Racism apparently says that saying things like "adios" and "no problemo" makes white people racist.

Honestly, at this point it is like they are totally diluting the meaning of the word racism. It used to mean people who were total bigots and assholes who really did think they were superior to others based on skin color. Now it means white people who are bad at speaking spanish, and like bellydancing and tacos.

It's on kindle and on audible. I originally listened to part of it as an audio book, which I had downloaded because I wanted to see if it was good before I bought the kindle version. I might actually still have the audio files, though distributing them would be less than legit.