male rape survivors

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Lithose_sl said:
I'm curious Tan; which is it? Does the gender of the speaker only matter when it's men commenting on male placement in the world? Because it seems like at first, during Kirun's admitted sophomoric attacks on your gender, you vehemently rejected the use of gender as an ad hominem for prejudice against opinions on gender issues. In other words, you stated,it doesn't matter what gender we are; our opinions on issues should not be looked at differently due to that(As that would be ignorant).

Yet, in following replies, you quite often assume the opponent is male--andthenassume his distaste for the term "privilege" is centered around his gender. What's worse, you then attempt to use prejudicial language within your statement to degrade the weight of his opinion based solely on the fact that he is a male, commenting on a subject. For example: Kirun is "pathetic" because he belongs to said privileged class (Through his gender) and is daring to comment on "privilege"; and Lejina is a "tool" with a "fragile ego" that can't cope (Again, because they are male and born into privilege). As you can see;you use the very fact that they are men, to attempt to illustrate the "pathetic" nature of them commenting on an argument about gender.

So I'm just very curious. When is it "okay" to use gender to invalidate someone's opinion? Is it only okay when it assumes the guise of privilege? Why? Isn't privilege just a pseudonym for gender in this case? All evidence seems to point to this conclusion; as none of the other circumstances the posters may have seemed to matter in regards to you being able to lump them into the privileged class--so therefor, we can assume "privilege" (At least in your arguments here)=male. And if so, again, why is it okay to use them being "male" to, as you said in your original post, take validity from their opinion? And I agree with your original point, vehemently; gender shouldn't impact the argument. It's not right to ignore a woman under the auspices of her belonging to the female sex. But I'm confused why so many feminists (I assure you, you're not alone) believe it's okay to do it to men.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the conversation, Lithose, always a pleasure to have your input.
You claim that I am using Kirun's gender to dismiss his argument, but even the quoted and bolded passages you have selected to illustrate this fail to do so. I never said "You're wrong about this because you're male", nor did I imply it. If a rich person complains about how little taxes poor people pay, I wouldn't say his opinion is invalid because he's rich, I would say his opinion is invalid because he's fundamentally out of touch. Now, of course you could say that he wouldn't be out of touch if he was poor, so I'm indirectly attacking him for being rich, but correlation doesn't mean causation. You can be a male and have perfectly valid points to make about gender issues, but if you choose to ignore certain aspects of how society is structured because it contradicts your opinion then yes, your opinion is less valid. I'm not attacking Kirun or Lejina for being male, I'm attacking them for being ignorant and pretending male privilege doesn't exist.
 
DickTrickle

DickTrickle

Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
13,508
15,754
It's cool when people read some evo psych and think it's a) totally scientifically ironclad and b) think nurture is largely insignificant to nature.
 
Kirun

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor
19,415
15,764
DickTrickle_sl said:
It's cool when people read some evo psych and think it's a) totally scientifically ironclad
Click to expand...
Many "theories" aren't scientifically ironclad. Theories have to be tested repeatedly. From that you prove/disprove commonality. When you have people testing these "theories" across life, sharing their experiences on a daily basis, and they all wind up being the same/similar? Well then...
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Actually theories in the realm of science are pretty ironclad. For something to become a theory usually takes a substantial amount of research and evidence. You are confusing the words "hypothesis" and "retarded idea" with "theory"
 
D

Dabamf_sl

shitlord
1,472
0
Psychological theories are certainly not ironclad. Often they are "this is the best way we can explain xyz right now." That evolution molded our behavior (evo psych) is absolutely a fact, but the extent to which it exerts influence is nothing but speculation at this point
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
You use the word wrong. And theories on psychology are certainly ironclad when they have been backed by countless neuroscience research.
 
D

Dabamf_sl

shitlord
1,472
0
theory[ thee-uh-ree, theer-ee ]
noun [plural the?o?ries.]
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact
 
Soygen

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,486
44,934
My theory is that this thread is terrible. This falls into the first definition of the word.
 
Aamry

Aamry

Blackwing Lair Raider
2,368
2,098
Is it the Theory of Gravity, or the Actual Fact of Gravity? Because if it's just a theory, I'm going to try jumping off the roof tomorrow.
 
Khane

Khane

Got something right about marriage
20,521
14,254
Aamry_sl said:
Is it the Theory of Gravity, or the Actual Fact of Gravity? Because if it's just a theory, I'm going to try jumping off the roof tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Uhh... I'm not scientist but isn't it the Law of Gravity? Did you mean Theory of Relativity?
 
P

Pennilenko

Silver Knight of the Realm
90
1
Personally I don't mind Tanoomba, although I disagree with nearly everything it* says. Tanoomba also makes it easier to identify other people that are clearly crazy.




*Actual Gender Unconfirmed
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,657
I don't hate trannyoomba. Most of the stuff that he says is irritating. Not because he's right and I hate to admit it, but because he's so transparently wrong about in many conclusions. Starts somewhere good and then takes it too far. But, eh. Aboot, eh? Who hasn't been a young college liberal at some point and flirted with ideas that they later reject. That cake still needs to cook.

Hate is a strong word. Trannyoomba can be funny sometimes.

Love the sin hate the sinner.

No wait.

Ehh, something like that.
 
J

Jais

Trakanon Raider
1,898
544
I'd like Tanoomba more if "he'd" go ahead an invert his dick into a cobbled together vag and spare the rest of us the shame of his inclusion in our sex/gender/identity/thefuckever.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Clearly, rumors of my being universally hated have been greatly exaggerated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.