So I made a post on facebook on how feminists say since men are seen to do more crimes, women are oppressed for being seen like the weaker gender is like saying how blacks seen doing more crimes show how whites are oppressed for being the weaker gender. Someone replied this, and I didn't know how to counter it. Do you think its a valid point?
no how are white males any more encouraged to commit violence than any other race? where is the evidence for that? they're not yet there not the ones at the statistically highest rates of violence.
>White males are encouraged and rewarded by society for being more violent and aggressive
This is literally the opposite of reality but it'll be unquestioned "common knowledge" pretty soon, just like every theory they shit out, and it makes me want to kill myself
>White men are encouraged and rewarded by society for being more violent and aggressive
Ask them for evidence and watch the rhetoric fall apart. That post is just a coagulation of buzzwords and conjecture.
Pull out her first paragraph and add
because that is all bullshit.
>Males are mocked if they do not act in thus way
the delusion is palpable
Also her spelling is terrible
>African American males are portrayed as being more violent
Portrayed by WHO? You can't just say they're "portrayed"! The media? The media bends over backwards to cover up and excuse violence done by black people.
Pound for pound women are FAR more violent then men. Women manipulate men to do their dirty work for them. Think of it kind of like President Obama. He has not actually killed anyone, with his own two hands. He orders other people to kill in his name (e.g., military air strikes, BATF, FBI, etc...). Same with women. They get their fathers, boyfriends, husbands, and the police to injury and kill, for them, so the women get no blood on their hands.
>Pound for pound women are FAR more violent then men. Women manipulate men to do their dirty work for them.
Yes, while this is true it's the same problem as with "fighting breeds" of dogs.
Yippy shit breeds bite dramatically more than any other, but they're still yippy shits. When a pom attacks, it's hilarious. Niggerbreed dogs are generally far better behaved, but when they do attack someone loses part of their face.
Such is the same with women. They're yippy breeds. They're violent, impulsive, and poorly obedience trained... but when they do go feral it's generally something you still just laugh at.
Don't make a fucking Facebook post about something that controversial if you don't know how to backup your claim. You just make yourself look like an idiot, and make the SJW's argument that more plausible.
You are almost there. The point is the yippee breed (women) can scream "muh rape", or other trigger word, and get the fighting breed (men) to kill for them. In fact, the yippee breed prefers this tactic. Watch the men fight over her. They enjoy it as entertainment.
>Thank you for proving the double standard bro.
Urgh, this guy sound like a fucking pain in the ass, he sounds like this other guy i know who's a real condescending piece of shit and i read this whole thing in his voice.
>white male violence encouraged and rewarded
>black male violence
you can cite this one if you've been on /pol/ long enough.
also differentiate between the TYPES of violence. is scrapping with another guy who's more or less your equal the same as robbing from an unarmed man with a gun?
also for the white male violence towards women "being encouraged":
Whites ARE the most violent race, but on a macro level. Wars, fascist governments, etc. That's the playground of White people.
Blacks are the most violent at the micro level. Assault, battery, rape, murder. That is where the nigger lives.
>White males are encouraged and rewarded by society for being more violent and aggressive
What? The first two paragraphs are just asspulling.
>African American males are portayed as being more violent and are constantly dehumanized as animalistic
Portrayed? The ones you see just fucking ARE. Stereotypes exist for a reason and the black community seems all too happy to enforce those stereotypes. Trying to make martyrs out of criminals and using wanton violence and property destruction to do so isn't helping.
Context is important here. Violence on who, what, why?
She talking about a soldier killing an enemy as manly and a nignog playing the knock out game as animalistic being a double standard? Because that's the only glorification I can see here. A white man acting like a savage prick would get the same treatment.
OP, you are a faggot.
But, to give you some solace, so is the other guy arguing with you on your Gaybook.
His spelling is dreadful ( Hense?? What the fuck?) and his points are not only not proven, they're more close to bullshit than they are the truth.
For example, are black men portrayed as aggressive as a 'tool of oppression' ? How exactly does this work? What oppression? By whom? There's no smoke without fire, and perhaps black men are portrayed as aggressive because,uh, they're aggressive ( use official crime stats by race to back this up. Also Sweden yes rape stats by race . )
These are facts. Slavery is long gone and still blacks are committing more crime. They portray THEMSELVES as animalistic : I know all sorts of black guys who say hot dayumdat ass, dat chicken, etc and when they appear bookish or smart they say they look"white".
Their music glorifies animalistic behaviour - my Anaconda don't want none if you ain't got buns hun, etc.
Also,the whole debate on your Fagbook looks fucking shit. Either leave Dickbook, stop posting shit tier triggers on aforementioned Twatbook or at the very least,spare us at /pol/ with your /b/tier shitposting.
they are mocked if they don't rape?
Last I checked they are shunned by entire communities and we even keep their names on a list after they get out of prison.
Yah. Not a good idea and not the right platform. Your supposed to post pictures of a sandwich that your eating or telling the world that your having coffee with jimmy. You know, meaningful things.
OP, when dealing with these people, you have to nail them down and make them give you proof of whatever bullshit that's spewing out of their mouths.
These sorts love to just dictate, declare, and indict. If you can keep from being put on the defensive by constantly defining terms and asking for sources, they'll eventually flip their shit and reveal just how maniacal they are underneath their contrived liberal exterior.
The first paragraph needs citation. Otherwise, it's a baseless opinion. The second paragraph could be disputed using FBI crime statistics. You could also point out that stereotypes exist for a reason, but be ready for the white devil stereotype she presents. As for the third paragraph, if one white male is convicted of a violent crime and is in prison for said crime, then the whole theory is rebuked, as that person is not glorified as manly, but incarcerated like an animal. People are imprisoned based off convictions of in a court of law, not by mob justice. The court, it could be argued, is biased, but if that is the case, then why are so many of the white collar criminals that are incarcerated white? That should point out the bias in her mind.
>this is where the nigger lives
>even in Violenceworld the nigger is stuck in the small-time ghetto living in the shadow of the white man
Parts of mainstream black culture are widely acknowledged to be dangerously hypermasculine by actual black people, and as such, black men are encouraged and rewarded for aggression and violence far more than white men. Young black men probably have higher testosterone than young white men. Male feminists are overwhelmingly white, attitudes towards male homosexuals and transgender people are higher amongst whites than blacks, and every other metric I can think of suggests that white men are slightly but significantly less driven by masculinity and masculine fear than black men.
Her theory is perfectly reasonable if and only if you accept the underlying assumption that white men are more insecure in their masculinity than black men, but all the signs indicate that they are not, so her argument is just so much unsubstantiated hot air.
It's a good response, but based on a few assumptions that I'm not completely comfortable with.
>white males are encouraged and rewarded by society for being more violent and aggressive
In an age when schools suspend kids at any sign of violence - even for having the audacity to get beaten up? Not sure I buy this.
>Violence toward women is glorified by society as part of the man's role
...except violence against women isn't glorified by society.
>African American males are portrayed as being more violent and are constantly dehumanized as animalistic
This only applies to African-American males? This describes the redneck stereotype perfectly. It also describes the way men of any race are described in many feminist productions.
Were this me, I would ask for a a liberal's worst nightmare - proof. They like broad statements like "x is disadvantaged" and "y is not socially accepted." Those statements are hard to prove, so they assume you'll just take them on faith. Don't.
>White males are encouraged by society to be violent and aggressive
>Violence toward women is glorified by society as part of a man's role
False. Society widely discourages men from being violent. ESPECIALY to women. Everywhere you look you have "don't beat women" and "stop bullying" messages.
>Violence towards women has become an acceptable norm
No it hasn't. You even get special spanking by government if the victim of your violent behavior ends up being a women.
>Males are mocked if they dont commit sexual violence
Really? All I see is people arguing how rape is bad and everyone everywhere is teaching boys not to be rapists.
>That rant about black people
It's not an excuse, it's facts.
OP delete this idiot from your friends list
>one in five women
You should know how to blow her out with that bullshit.
>On you are welcome to due your own research
Jesus that spelling. Remind her that the burden of proof is on her.
>He thinks his #HOTTAKES on current events are "meaningful"
Just picture the girls laughing maymay because I can't even be bothered to attach it to this post. Your shit isn't worth the trouble.
This chick needs to cite more than her thesis. She needs to cite peer reviewed data in order for opinions to be valid. The fact that she still refuses to do so is proof of her bias. The fact that she wrote a thesis is proof that this bias rules her life. We call that shadow projection. She if projecting the negative aspects of her personality on society at large. She is delusional at best.
oh just link her a thunderfoot or tl;dr or saargon video on rape culture. she's obviously trying to "educate you" on rape culture without uttering the word.
And do mention how she completely avoided every point you made. Ask her if she agrees that she's not right since silence = approval?
>one in five women will be raped
Again, citation needed.
>you can find it on my sociology thesis
top kek. Looks like you get to read a sociology thesis, enjoy your cancer. At least that has sources...perhaps. More likely it cites other papers, which just cite papers before them, which eventually culminates in some marxist's rambling that has no basis in reality. But there's no way to prove that without actually examining her sources.
That said, now would be a good time to evaluate what it is you're trying to accomplish by messaging her. Even supposing you completely trounce her and drag her thesis through the mud, she'll only resent you for it. Arguing against people gets you nowhere; the real trick is to make them argue in favor of a position of yours. Ever notice how strongly held everyone's beliefs are on /pol/, and that we almost never succeed in convincing the other side of anything? How even when the faggot OP gets completely BTFO, the best we can hope for is a ragequit? That's because arguing your position makes you more emotionally invested in it, so arguing against her like this, while gratifying, ultimately won't get anywhere.
Analyze her post. What is she concerned about; what matters to her? "Justice?" Equal opportunity? Portrayals of women and blacks in the media?
Now think where you want her to be. She isn't going to suddenly say "XIV/88 gas the kikes" if you switch sides; this isn't Looney Tunes. However, it might possible to lead some of her opinions into areas where she isn't quite as entrenched and you would have a chance at getting her to espouse your ideas.
People don't care about sexual violence because of frequent media portrayals of it? This is bad, obviously. How does she propose we fix that? She likely hasn't thought about this side of things as much since it's not a direct frontal assault on her beliefs.
Just some ideas; maybe you'll find them useful.
> cites her own fucking thesis
> "'due' your own research"
> spouts debunked stats from clickbait headlines
why are u still talking to this cockface.
Oh, and protip: as far as I know, instances of rape and sexual violence have been going down dramatically for the past three decades.
but why use facts when you have narratives.
The rape statistics are false and the sexual assault epidemic is a hoax.
Also you have anecdotal evidence that society actually opposes violent behavior with all the anti-bullying messages everywhere, and the "stop violence on women" messages everywhere.
And please tell her to do research and cite sources other than herself when posting ridiculous claims.
The basis of your argument should be violence with intelligence ie Caesar who used it to build one of the greatest empire verses wanton violence ie Nero who brought it to its knees.
Talking with a woman. AKA a circular self-rationalization machine.
Talk with a woman. You lose. Attempt to reason with a woman. You lose. Plead with a woman to show some sense of fairness, justice, and decency (she has none). You lose.
Ignore women, wander off, and live your life bitch-free. You win.
What fucking fantasy world do they live in where white violence towards women...or anyone for that matter, is glorified?
I would be considered white trash for even getting in a fight with another white male.
you are just too weak to fight a self-rationalization machine. you need to fight fire with fire.
the difference between you and her is: your opinion boils down to facts and logic, whereas she is just rationalizing her false opinion. eventually they admit defeat.
you've done it now OP kiss your social life goodbye she's going to go on a rampage
well played though that response is pretty well written
B T F O
Also, prepare for the massive liberal assblast.