Posts made by raphjd

@quangtran:

I used to laugh at people who were deemed "SJW" but quickly realized that the entire anti-SJW movement was co-opted by racists and alt-righters. They claim to be against modern feminism and BLM, but really they are just against women and black people. It has got to the point were anyone who uses the term "cuck" and "SJW" is likely a terrible human being.

The same can be said for your side.

Your side set a building on fire to prevent "wrong think".  You guys gloated that it was set on fire with people in it.

Your side says it's ok to beat the shit out of people even after they are laying, unconscious and bleeding in the street.

It's your side that says "just believe" and to throw men in prison for rape solely on a woman's say so.

It's your side that did $15,000 worth of damage to a frat house based on a complete lie and non of you said sorry or helped pay for the damage.

It's your side that thinks it's ok to set a girl's hair on fire because she doesn't agree with you.

It's ok to pour a bottle of piss on a reporter's head because she asked questions you didn't have answers for.

It's ok for a man to hit a woman for disagreeing with feminism.

It's ok to false flag at every turn to create "hate crimes" that never happened.

Yeah, who's really the bad side?

None of my black friends like BLM.    They freak out whenever people assume that because they are black that they agree with BLM.

I agree that it is racist to think that blacks automatically support BLM.

If we aren't all part of the gay borg collective, then we deemed evil by our fellow fags.

I don't cuck to BLM, so I'm a racist.

I don't cuck to feminism, so I hate women.

I pointed out 2 proven lies by a Congressman, so I'm a racist.

It's always the same shit with SJWs.

If you disagree with setting a building on fire with people in it to prevent "wrong think", then you are a hate monger.

If you disagree with beating the shit out of people who you "think" might disagree with the fag collective, then you are evil.

If you claim that wearing boys' underwear doesn't make you trans, then you are evil.

If you don't believe a woman is gender fluid because she occasionally wears jeans, then you are evil.

If you say that being a cross dresser does not make you transsexual, you are a transphobe.

Saying that Elliot Cope isn't trans because she is not, makes you a transphobe.

Modern SJWs don't fight for anything real, they just want something to whine about to make them feel special.

Let's not for get how SJWs, especially black SJWs, treat blacks who disagree with their bullshit.   Non-SJW blacks are called white washed, coons, house niggers, chimps, and many other things.

@sybarite:

What are you, ten years old? Wow, how terrible, a stupid ad got pulled because it implied Pepsi could fix the long-standing racial disparities that remain in America. A gay man babbling about SJWs is just the saddest thing I've ever seen – many of us are only alive today because WE ARE SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS, and when discrimination and the AIDS epidemic hit back, we didn't sit around pissing our pants and whining about 'cucks', we fought back.

You proved me right, most gays demand a hive mind.

Modern SJWs are fighting for bullshit, not justified causes.  It's like the recent discussion I had here with another user about feminism.  He had no idea about anything, just the misinformation he was told by feminists.   He clearly never looked up anything for himself, because anything I brought up he could only respond with "I haven't hear about that" or similar.   Everything was justified by screaming "the patriarchy".

BLM doesn't care about innocent black lives, they only care about thugs.   They too refuse to admit that blacks play an integral part in the issue they are complaining about.  When you compare crime stats against police shootings, blacks are actually shot far less than you would expect.  BLM screams that official stats are racist.

Nobody seriously thought/thinks that Pepsi can solve the world's ills.   BLM just needed another thing to whine about.

Let's forget that the ad has Kendall Jenner (wish that whole lot would go away).

SJWs, especially BLM, lost their shit because they claim that the new Pepsi ad is too police friendly.

SJWs win.

Pepsi pulls the ad and apologizes to BLM.

Fucking hell, humanity deserves to be wiped out.

BTW, I'm surprised feminists aren't claiming they are the ones who actually won since feminism cures all ills.

:police:  Please tone down the language.  You can disagree without being utterly rude.  :police:

Why do people come to this section just to complain that this section exists?

I bet they would have no problem with this section if every post was slagging off non SJWs.

Obama isn't your average liberal.  He's not one of the people with his face covered setting fire to a building while people are in to prevent "wrong speak".

You still haven't explained why liberals love illegals, while ridiculing those who went the legal route.  We've seen that here.

@inkball:

@raphjd:

Liberals do themselves no favors by constant flaming of anyone who they deem "wrong think/speak".    They can't discuss whatever topic it is, they just do personal attacks.   If it's in person, then liberals get extremely violent.

Raphjd, I never flamed or personally attacked anyone. Meanwhile, jojojojo3 calls me "shit" and "stupid butt slutt." This is a clear violation of your own rules against name calling.

As hmmfer mentions, this entire thread was created to stigmatize and attack liberals.

In the future, please use the REPORT button on the specific post so I can find it/them.

I disagree about calling you "shit".  He was comparing you to Santorum, whom he said is shit.  He was saying you both are equally intolerant, just on opposite sides.

I do agree with about "stupid butt slut".  That is uncalled for and he was given a warning for that.

As for this thread, it may be about insulting liberals, but look how many we have that are nothing more than flaming non liberals.  We have one thread that says that anyone who is a conservative (more like anyone who isn't far left) is a racist because of guilt by association.

I hate the way political parties on both sides are acting.  This shit started back during Clinton with the "contract with America".

Neither party is the "good side" of this.

Liberals do themselves no favors by constant flaming of anyone who they deem "wrong think/speak".    They can't discuss whatever topic it is, they just do personal attacks.  If it's in person, then liberals get extremely violent.

I think it's funny how liberals on YouTube got butt hurt over liberal videos getting banned for actual violations, after years of liberals doing false DMCAs against those they didn't like.

WOW, who would have thunk it.  A liberal with no argument, just personal attacks.

You proved my point about liberals refusing to have any discussion.  THANK!!!! :cheers:

In reality, real psychologists have weighed in on this topic.

In reality, most psychologists are liberals.  They are gonna make themselves look better, not worse.

He said that a few people outside the gay hive mind has made the site "distasteful".

@Negrescence:

Admissions to sights such as stormfront and other supremacist sites increased tenfold with the rise of Trump. Their has been a rise of racial antagonism and the federal hate map has seen an increase in hate groups.  More hate groups are parading in the streets and holding more announced gatherings they otherwise would have been more discreet about. They have indeed been more embolden by Trumps rhetoric and their desire to "get their country back".

Do you not see the connection between BLM and other bullshit like "white people go around" forcing white students to walk through a creek to get to class and the rise in whites pushing back?

Facebook hates wrong think, er um conservative views, but they have no problem with videos showing live puppies being fed to snakes or beheading videos.

All social media is pretty far left leaning.

Instead of blaming women for their failings, you blame some made up crap.    You believe women have no agency.

You ignore female privilege.

You ignore feminists fighting against gender equality.

You are a sexist.

@YoungGun:

@raphjd:

Your only point is no female US President.   The rest of it is a bunch of crap.

You have no rebuttal to my points so you claim that I'm confused.   Typical SJW bullshit.

You demand that we ignore the lunatic fringe, but fighting against gender equality is mainstream feminism.

There are actually more points, but the President point alone invalidates your whole argument so you definitely need to defend that if nothing else.  So far you have not, which means you've formed opinions based on a truth you clearly can't even justify.  That betrays a lack of objectivity and a trend towards bias and emotional decision-making.  AKA that's why I claimed you've been programmed by the right.  You should have thought through all the arguments on all sides, and if you haven't, then at least admit when you haven't and be willing to admit when you're wrong/uninformed/etc.  Instead you want to play games and try changing topics when you can't defend points.  It's a credibility-destroying tactic and shows you're arguing out of ego or agenda instead of truth-seeking or higher values.

As Trudeau said, it's extremely difficult to get women to run for office.

If women wanted a woman President, it would happen.  There would be nothing men could do to stop it.

This is where you blame "patriarchy".

Now refute my points.

Your only point is no female US President.  The rest of it is a bunch of crap.

You have no rebuttal to my points so you claim that I'm confused.  Typical SJW bullshit.

You demand that we ignore the lunatic fringe, but fighting against gender equality is mainstream feminism.

I'll talk with you, since "raphjd" either lacks the intelligence to stay on topic (I could see going off on a tangent here and there as we all do that, but when it's pointed out to him and he is literally just repeating himself over and over again–then there's nowhere for us to go) or knows he can't counter logical arguments based on truth, so he's just relying on reciting the same talking points which have little to do with the points that I brought up.

I'll ignore the personal attack.

You have no points that are worthwhile and you have no answer for the things I have talked about except "the patriarchy".    "The Patriarchy" is you answer for everything.

Why did feminists fight against gender neutral sex crime laws in the UK?  THE PATRIARCHY

Why did feminists fight against a gender neutral retirement age?  THE PATRIARCHY

You excuse away everything feminists do to prevent true gender equality.    You ignore all examples of female privilege, while screaming that everything oppresses women.