You PC Brah??

I've heard a lot about this website being fuckign insane, but now I see why that rumor is spread, cause it's fact. I'll be voicing my opinion over issues I feel that are important or combatting idiocy and victim mentality. I guess i should do that stupid thing where i list every group i possibly belong to and over exaggerate learning disablities so I can sound even more victimized.

[critiqueoftheworld]

Ever notice how every single "body positive" fat person always wears their pants up past their belly button. It's almost as if they know it's not good to be fat

[critiqueoftheworld]

ever notice how all the people who claim to be ‘polygender’, ‘trigender’, ‘agender’ or anything like that are always middle school and high school teenagers. its almost as if...they’re making up identities in order to be part of a group. probably not though cause when have teenagers lied because they were insecure.

[critiqueoftheworld]

Wanna know what's funny...3rd wave "tolerant" feminists

[critiqueoftheworld]

The 2016 Election

Wanna know why Trump won? He won because of liberals, not because of racism or sexism or homophobic or any other buzzword that being passed around. For the past 8 years liberals have been shaming republicans for their believes and making them feel as if their voices didn’t matter. The left pushed globalism, multiculturalism, identity politics, but mainly political correctness to the point of where moderate liberals no longer identified as liberal. 

While republicans were becoming more open to gay marriage, the expression of opposing views, and more liberal ideas; Liberals were creating trigger warnings, safe spaces, echo chambers and creating a hostile environment to anyone who doesn’t think like them. Instead of listening to the concerns of Republicans, You’d shame them and bully them into silence...only hardening their views. 

The result of this election is the moderate left and republicans rejecting this callout culture that they left has created. You have only yourself to blame. you know who you are; you’re the people who wear open mindedness as a badge rather then actually caring; you only become “activists” when people are watching and when it doesn’t require you to actually work. 

Anytime someone would criticize Islam, they’d be called every name in the book. If you don’t support Black Lives Matter, you’re a racist. If you question feminism, you’re a sexist. If you believe gay marriage is a state issue and not a federal one, you’d be called a homophobe. When you name call instead of having an actual political discussion, the views don’t change. “make bigots scared again” will do nothing but secure a reelection for Trump. Liberals should have won this election...let’s hope they quit the name calling and bullying and start trying to come together. 

[critiqueoftheworld]

Self Identity

I’ve noticed that the people who identify as otherkin, deitykin, fictionkin, etc, always identify as the cool ones and never the shitty ones. Is it just coincidence that everyone of them has some really powerful creature that is in control of or the leader of something. They’re never and kin that just follow. There’s no bacteriakin or houseflykin, and you wanna know why? thats cause none of them want to be that, cause they won’t get the satisfaction they’ve been wanting from it. Otherkin who are some really powerful creature are most likely that because they lack power in the real world so they imagine themselves as everything they wish they could be in the real world.

[tradicalskelly]

As skeletonkin, this offends me so much. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[critiqueoftheworld]

Are…are you serious? I’d normally assume you’re kidding but the people who are normally on this site are the same ones who want trigger warning and safe spaces….

[tradicalskelly]

Are you saying that deep deep down you don’t believe you are a skeleton?  ;^)

[critiqueoftheworld]

Did you just assume I have a skeleton lol. I'm like literally shaking

[critiqueoftheworld]

Self Identity

I’ve noticed that the people who identify as otherkin, deitykin, fictionkin, etc, always identify as the cool ones and never the shitty ones. Is it just coincidence that everyone of them has some really powerful creature that is in control of or the leader of something. They’re never and kin that just follow. There’s no bacteriakin or houseflykin, and you wanna know why? thats cause none of them want to be that, cause they won’t get the satisfaction they’ve been wanting from it. Otherkin who are some really powerful creature are most likely that because they lack power in the real world so they imagine themselves as everything they wish they could be in the real world.

[tradicalskelly]

As skeletonkin, this offends me so much. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[critiqueoftheworld]

Are...are you serious? I'd normally assume you're kidding but the people who are normally on this site are the same ones who want trigger warning and safe spaces....

[rad-bi-blog]

people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because it’s politically inconvenient to you

[critiqueoftheworld]

Does this apply to conservatives or does it only apply to people who you agree with

[rad-bi-blog]

do i know you? what kind of leading question…

[critiqueoftheworld]

Well you did post this on a PUBLIC site where anyone can comment so I commented.

[rad-bi-blog]

okay? good for you. to answer your question, my post means exactly what is says and to assume otherwise is your own bias. is my post inconvenient to your political views?

[critiqueoftheworld]

No it doesn’t go against my political views. But when I see these kinds of posts, it’s often just another way of saying that “as long as your world view matches mine, you will always be allowed to speak”. For instance, did you know that almost every top economist in the west right now and most moderate feminists agree that the wage gap isn’t as big as it’s often said to be and the reason for its existence makes a lot of sense once you add in other factors such as the jobs each gender typically takes, maternity leave, etc.

[rad-bi-blog]

look if you see the post “people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because its politically inconvenient to you” and think that i meant “as long as your views match mine” that says more about you than it says about me. I said nothing of the sort on this post, in fact, ypu were the only one to bring this up. maybe you should spend some time thinking on why you tried to derail my post. maybe its because my views “dont match yours”?

[critiqueoftheworld]

Well instead of answering my question you got defensive and completely went around answering it. You’re a self proclaimed radical feminist and from what I’ve seen, all across this website and in the real world, they tend to advocate sharing other views but never go through with it. Instead of answering my question you got mad and defensive asking “do I know you…” even thought you posted this on a public site and created hashtags for easy finding of your post, so clearly you wanted responses. Then you don’t answer the question and turn it around on me to which I said “no your opinions aren’t against my political views”. Then when I post a fact that has been accepted by all most every economist in the country. Instead of answering or even responding on that topic, you get more defensive and try making me looking like the bad guy, even though it started off as me trying to ask a question in a non hostile way and you getting hostile. To me it looks like you proved my point and if that’s not the case, you can state why it isn’t. To me though, that’s what it looks like; I’ll be 100% open to a counter argument from you.

[rad-bi-blog]

this isn’t a debate though. you essentially accused me of beinh a hypocrite without even knowing me. I don’t owe you a debate, although I’m sure you’d like it. Honestly, you don’t seem like an interesting person to debate with and you make assumptions about random strangers based on misinformation on what radical feminism is. I’m not going to “counter argue” at you. I’m just making sure you understand that my post means what it says, I don’t owe you any other explanation that what the original post says. If you doubt that I mean what I say, again, that’s your own issue. Now get off of my post please, your original comment was incorrect and you have not proven to be a good person to debate with. Bye!

[critiqueoftheworld]

Oh ok so if you're annoyed that I don't know what radical feminism is wouldn't it be smart to try and educate. But what ever hun bye

[gentleradfem]

@critiqueoftheworld just because you’re gay and you’re saying you’re not oppressed doesn’t make it true? gay people still face discrimination TODAY, that’s literally a fact. i literally linked you to the studies my dude so idk wtf you’re talking about. women don’t need makeup to look presentable/presentable! the fact that people think that they do is because of fake beauty standards and the patriarchy. if men don’t, women don’t! what the fuck how can you literally not see that glaringly obvious double standard. it’s not the right of employers to be less likely to hire a woman who isn’t wearing makeup! i obviously understand dress code, but the fact that makeup is required for women and not for men is– sexism!!! surprise!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/10385501/Bosses-admit-they-would-discriminate-against-women-not-wearing-makeup.html

here’s the study one more time just in case!!!!!!

@critiqueoftheworld

[critiqueoftheworld]

There’s defiantly discrimination that gay people face however we aren’t oppressed. Oppression is much worst then any discrimination gays face and in all honesty gays have it pretty good when you think about what gays in other countries go through. I didn’t see the links you posted but I see them now, I’m assuming it’s the underlined words. And no it’s not sexism to say that make up is a requirement, it’s called a dress code and looking presentable. Men don’t need to wear make up however we do need to shave and do other things that women don’t need to do. It’s not a double standard; a double standard would be that it’s socially acceptable for women to hit men regardless of the context but it’s not ok for men to hit women regardless of the context. Both genders need to follow dress code but they need to do different things. Not every women looks good without make up just like every guy doesn’t look good with a beard, mustache and/or long hair.

[gentleradfem]

dude, the definition for oppression is “unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power” and while it may not be cruel anymore, the government is still unjust towards gay people/black people/other marginalized groups/minorities just because we have it better here doesn’t mean it’s gone completely? either there’s systematic oppression against a group of people or there’s not. only men need to shave because they’re the only ones who grow facial hair……… both men and women have faces, and yet women are expected to spend money & time doing unnecessary shit to it bc men say they need to. that’s not fair. you literally mentioned previously how women are oppressed bc they have to cover up their hair and men don’t. same concept. it literally is a double standard…. women have to wear makeup, men don’t…. also miss me with that “it’s socially acceptable for women to hit men” shit. yeah fucking right if people women and men need to do different things based on BIOLOGY, i.e. shaving, that’s fine. but there are no biological differences that make forcing women to wear makeup acceptable.

[critiqueoftheworld]

The cruel part is what causes it to be oppression. A systemic discrimination would be how if a girl hits a guy and the guy hits back it would be the guy who gets in trouble. This has been documented many times at schools. The only reason he got in trouble was because he’s a boy and if it the school enforcing that then is that not systemic discrimination. No the covering of the hair is much different; that’s where it’s govt law and it’s enforced by sharia and other Muslims. And it is socially acceptable for women to hit men, they done multiple social experiments and studies showing this. A show called “What Would You Do?” Did an experiment where a man hit a women to simulate domestic abuse and people went up in arms to defend the women and multiple people tried calling the police. When they did one where the women was hitting the man, they were shocked by the results. They waited for 4 hours in a crowded park for someone to intervene…only 1 person did. Some women were even showing support for the women when questioned later by the TV show. This idea that men have it amazing is ridiculous. I’m not saying I support women having to wear makeup in the work place but I defiantly understand it and also understand that a lot of women wear makeup because they feel pretty. Maybe you don’t, which is fine, but A LOT of women do.

[gentleradfem]

oh my godddd you actually think people are sexist against men it’s almost like….. men have been abusing women forever….. so that’s why theyre more likely to think the man is at fault AND you literally agreed with my point and said something completely off topic women feel pretty when they wear makeup because theyre told theyre ugly without it! not that that has anything to do with what we were talking about! but there’s obviously no changing your mind so lmao bye nice talking to you

[critiqueoftheworld]

Ok bye. You're still in high school. You're naive and know little of how the real world works. You're the only who clearly doesn't want to change their minds. People can be sexist against men, don't be ignorant. Have fun in your eco chamber; hope you grow up and understand how life works.

[gentleradfem]

@critiqueoftheworld just because you’re gay and you’re saying you’re not oppressed doesn’t make it true? gay people still face discrimination TODAY, that’s literally a fact. i literally linked you to the studies my dude so idk wtf you’re talking about. women don’t need makeup to look presentable/presentable! the fact that people think that they do is because of fake beauty standards and the patriarchy. if men don’t, women don’t! what the fuck how can you literally not see that glaringly obvious double standard. it’s not the right of employers to be less likely to hire a woman who isn’t wearing makeup! i obviously understand dress code, but the fact that makeup is required for women and not for men is– sexism!!! surprise!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/10385501/Bosses-admit-they-would-discriminate-against-women-not-wearing-makeup.html

here’s the study one more time just in case!!!!!!

@critiqueoftheworld

[critiqueoftheworld]

There’s defiantly discrimination that gay people face however we aren’t oppressed. Oppression is much worst then any discrimination gays face and in all honesty gays have it pretty good when you think about what gays in other countries go through. I didn’t see the links you posted but I see them now, I’m assuming it’s the underlined words. And no it’s not sexism to say that make up is a requirement, it’s called a dress code and looking presentable. Men don’t need to wear make up however we do need to shave and do other things that women don’t need to do. It’s not a double standard; a double standard would be that it’s socially acceptable for women to hit men regardless of the context but it’s not ok for men to hit women regardless of the context. Both genders need to follow dress code but they need to do different things. Not every women looks good without make up just like every guy doesn’t look good with a beard, mustache and/or long hair.

[gentleradfem]

dude, the definition for oppression is “unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power” and while it may not be cruel anymore, the government is still unjust towards gay people/black people/other marginalized groups/minorities just because we have it better here doesn’t mean it’s gone completely? either there’s systematic oppression against a group of people or there’s not. only men need to shave because they’re the only ones who grow facial hair……… both men and women have faces, and yet women are expected to spend money & time doing unnecessary shit to it bc men say they need to. that’s not fair. you literally mentioned previously how women are oppressed bc they have to cover up their hair and men don’t. same concept. it literally is a double standard…. women have to wear makeup, men don’t…. also miss me with that “it’s socially acceptable for women to hit men” shit. yeah fucking right if people women and men need to do different things based on BIOLOGY, i.e. shaving, that’s fine. but there are no biological differences that make forcing women to wear makeup acceptable.

[critiqueoftheworld]

The cruel part is what causes it to be oppression. A systemic discrimination would be how if a girl hits a guy and the guy hits back it would be the guy who gets in trouble. This has been documented many times at schools. The only reason he got in trouble was because he's a boy and if it the school enforcing that then is that not systemic discrimination. No the covering of the hair is much different; that's where it's govt law and it's enforced by sharia and other Muslims. And it is socially acceptable for women to hit men, they done multiple social experiments and studies showing this. A show called "What Would You Do?" Did an experiment where a man hit a women to simulate domestic abuse and people went up in arms to defend the women and multiple people tried calling the police. When they did one where the women was hitting the man, they were shocked by the results. They waited for 4 hours in a crowded park for someone to intervene...only 1 person did. Some women were even showing support for the women when questioned later by the TV show. This idea that men have it amazing is ridiculous. I'm not saying I support women having to wear makeup in the work place but I defiantly understand it and also understand that a lot of women wear makeup because they feel pretty. Maybe you don't, which is fine, but A LOT of women do.

[rad-bi-blog]

people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because it’s politically inconvenient to you

[critiqueoftheworld]

Does this apply to conservatives or does it only apply to people who you agree with

[rad-bi-blog]

do i know you? what kind of leading question…

[critiqueoftheworld]

Well you did post this on a PUBLIC site where anyone can comment so I commented.

[rad-bi-blog]

okay? good for you. to answer your question, my post means exactly what is says and to assume otherwise is your own bias. is my post inconvenient to your political views?

[critiqueoftheworld]

No it doesn’t go against my political views. But when I see these kinds of posts, it’s often just another way of saying that “as long as your world view matches mine, you will always be allowed to speak”. For instance, did you know that almost every top economist in the west right now and most moderate feminists agree that the wage gap isn’t as big as it’s often said to be and the reason for its existence makes a lot of sense once you add in other factors such as the jobs each gender typically takes, maternity leave, etc.

[rad-bi-blog]

look if you see the post “people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because its politically inconvenient to you” and think that i meant “as long as your views match mine” that says more about you than it says about me. I said nothing of the sort on this post, in fact, ypu were the only one to bring this up. maybe you should spend some time thinking on why you tried to derail my post. maybe its because my views “dont match yours”?

[critiqueoftheworld]

Well instead of answering my question you got defensive and completely went around answering it. You’re a self proclaimed radical feminist and from what I’ve seen, all across this website and in the real world, they tend to advocate sharing other views but never go through with it. Instead of answering my question you got mad and defensive asking “do I know you…” even thought you posted this on a public site and created hashtags for easy finding of your post, so clearly you wanted responses. Then you don’t answer the question and turn it around on me to which I said "no your opinions aren’t against my political views". Then when I post a fact that has been accepted by all most every economist in the country. Instead of answering or even responding on that topic, you get more defensive and try making me looking like the bad guy, even though it started off as me trying to ask a question in a non hostile way and you getting hostile. To me it looks like you proved my point and if that’s not the case, you can state why it isn’t. To me though, that’s what it looks like; I’ll be 100% open to a counter argument from you.

[gentleradfem]

@critiqueoftheworld just because you’re gay and you’re saying you’re not oppressed doesn’t make it true? gay people still face discrimination TODAY, that’s literally a fact. i literally linked you to the studies my dude so idk wtf you’re talking about. women don’t need makeup to look presentable/presentable! the fact that people think that they do is because of fake beauty standards and the patriarchy. if men don’t, women don’t! what the fuck how can you literally not see that glaringly obvious double standard. it’s not the right of employers to be less likely to hire a woman who isn’t wearing makeup! i obviously understand dress code, but the fact that makeup is required for women and not for men is– sexism!!! surprise!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/10385501/Bosses-admit-they-would-discriminate-against-women-not-wearing-makeup.html

here’s the study one more time just in case!!!!!!

@critiqueoftheworld

[critiqueoftheworld]

Also I just looked at your link and I did digging into it. The bosses said that they would be less likely to hire a women who is applying for a job position that requires them in sales or people to people interacting jobs. First impression is everything. Do you really think some scruffy guy with long hair and a mustache would get the job for sales? No it would be someone who has a good first impression. Also that study is 4 years old and things could have changed in that time period and it only applies to the U.K., not the US, so its most likely different here.

[gentleradfem]

@critiqueoftheworld just because you’re gay and you’re saying you’re not oppressed doesn’t make it true? gay people still face discrimination TODAY, that’s literally a fact. i literally linked you to the studies my dude so idk wtf you’re talking about. women don’t need makeup to look presentable/presentable! the fact that people think that they do is because of fake beauty standards and the patriarchy. if men don’t, women don’t! what the fuck how can you literally not see that glaringly obvious double standard. it’s not the right of employers to be less likely to hire a woman who isn’t wearing makeup! i obviously understand dress code, but the fact that makeup is required for women and not for men is– sexism!!! surprise!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/10385501/Bosses-admit-they-would-discriminate-against-women-not-wearing-makeup.html

here’s the study one more time just in case!!!!!!

@critiqueoftheworld

[critiqueoftheworld]

There's defiantly discrimination that gay people face however we aren't oppressed. Oppression is much worst then any discrimination gays face and in all honesty gays have it pretty good when you think about what gays in other countries go through. I didn't see the links you posted but I see them now, I'm assuming it's the underlined words. And no it's not sexism to say that make up is a requirement, it's called a dress code and looking presentable. Men don't need to wear make up however we do need to shave and do other things that women don't need to do. It's not a double standard; a double standard would be that it's socially acceptable for women to hit men regardless of the context but it's not ok for men to hit women regardless of the context. Both genders need to follow dress code but they need to do different things. Not every women looks good without make up just like every guy doesn't look good with a beard, mustache and/or long hair.

[rad-bi-blog]

people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because it’s politically inconvenient to you

[critiqueoftheworld]

Does this apply to conservatives or does it only apply to people who you agree with

[rad-bi-blog]

do i know you? what kind of leading question…

[critiqueoftheworld]

Well you did post this on a PUBLIC site where anyone can comment so I commented.

[rad-bi-blog]

okay? good for you. to answer your question, my post means exactly what is says and to assume otherwise is your own bias. is my post inconvenient to your political views?

[critiqueoftheworld]

No it doesn’t go against my political views. But when I see these kinds of posts, it’s often just another way of saying that “as long as your world view matches mine, you will always be allowed to speak”. For instance, did you know that almost every top economist in the west right now and most moderate feminists agree that the wage gap isn’t as big as it’s often said to be and the reason for its existence makes a lot of sense once you add in other factors such as the jobs each gender typically takes, maternity leave, etc.

[rad-bi-blog]

people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because it’s politically inconvenient to you

[critiqueoftheworld]

Does this apply to conservatives or does it only apply to people who you agree with

[rad-bi-blog]

do i know you? what kind of leading question…

[critiqueoftheworld]

Well you did post this on a PUBLIC site where anyone can comment so I commented.

[sapphic-femme]

i love it when boys feel all oppressed by my misandrist posts, it’s so cute

[critiqueoftheworld]

I find it hilarious how the same women who claim to want to destroy sexism and create gender equality are the same ones who are proud of being openly sexist(i.e. Misandrist)

[gentleradfem]

i feel like the difference between radical feminism and liberal feminism is that liberal feminism tries to make the oppression of women empowering and tries to convince everyone that our oppression somehow can be flipped and used against men whereas radical feminism actually wants to change the status of women in society and lift us out of places of oppression liberal feminism: yeah women are oppressed by makeup, but what if we like it and make it ~empowering~ radical feminism: yeah women are oppressed by makeup, so we should fight against it and stop wearing it

[critiqueoftheworld]

Being radical is exactly what has caused this ever growing juggernaut of distain for feminism. Being radical in anything is bad, that's why it's called radical. You might view makeup as oppressive but a lot of women do not; so why force your beliefs on the women who don't agree with you? Also saying you're oppressed in the first world let alone the western world is factually inaccurate. Maybe you're inconvenienced or annoyed because of something that happens but you are in no way oppressed. Oppression is being tortured to death for speaking out against a government; stoned to death for your sexuality; or being killed for not covering your hair. Choosing to wear makeup, key word choosing, is not oppression.

[rad-bi-blog]

people shouldn’t have to shut up about their real life experiences just because it’s politically inconvenient to you

[critiqueoftheworld]

Does this apply to conservatives or does it only apply to people who you agree with