This is a link post with no self text.
Read-only view. Voting and replying are not offered because the app-only OAuth token cannot perform them.
threads deeper than 5 levels start collapsed
They're not being inconsistent. They want to protect women like they protect their property, which means they can also do whatever they want. These people are sick and should have never been allowed a seat at the table.
I interpreted it as they only want to protect “their” women, the ones that agree with them lol
the ones who agree with them are still not free from the same abuse.
The ones that have no choice but to agree with them, or else.
Because it's about property rights for them, not human rights.
edited
Yea, "protect our women" not "protect the women"
Yeah it's a fundamental difference between conservative and liberal thought: conservatives only care about whether their people are getting a fair shake in society.
and meaning "ours" the same way they would speak of farm machinery
They also don't mean 'from us', they mean 'from swarthy foreign types'. It really isn't about protecting women at all, it's just another excuse for hate.
Remember Obama addressing a protestor at one of his rallies? He straight up told the crowd to quiet down and encouraged polite discourse.
Trump called her fat.
Sad that "women don't get assaulted at your rally" is now a selling point, but here we are. There's a clear difference indeed.
I don't know if this makes it "sadder" because, honestly, WTF are people at any political rally doing punching women in the face and why are they not automatically arrested?
But apparently "punching women in the face" is something that happens at political rallies for parties that support abortions in the name of "defending children" and are against trans rights in the name of "protecting women."
!gif
WTF are people at any political rally doing punching women in the face and why are they not automatically arrested?
I'm not sure if you've mingled with the common clay of the U.S. recently but about 90% of these fuckers have the emotional regulation ability of a toddler hopped up on red bull.
I grew up around these people. They basically think any problem can be shot, punched, or bombed to solve it.
common clay of the U.S.
Nice.
When certain people hear “men and women should be equal” the first thing they say is “so I can punch a woman then and you’d be ok with it?!?” as if that’s some kind of gotcha argument against equality. Those people vote Republican.
As if they don't already punch women that they definitely don't treat as equal
Are we generally okay with men going around punching each other in the face? I haven't seen such a fight in person since high school, most grow out of that behavior.
No, punching people in the face for no reason is illegal regardless of gender.
I can see it now - either 'define a woman!' or 'they wanted equal rights!'...
/s
Add that being a pedophile is bad ... Cooking steak well done with ketchup...
All these things ...could have stopped a lot earlier....but the maga tolerance for this crap
Studies also show that "radical acts perpetrated by individuals associated with left-wing causes are less likely to be violent. In the United States, we find no difference between the level of violence perpetrated by right-wing and Islamist extremists.", and numerous investigations show that "right-wing populists are generally more likely to justify political violence compared to mainstream voters and non-voters".
Conservatism \-- by definition -- is "a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing the importance of established hierarchies and institutions (such as religion, the family, and class structure), and preferring gradual development to abrupt change".
The sole value of conservatism is respect for and obedience to \[one's perception of\] traditionally established hierarchy, and hierarchy dictates that those on top (in-groups) are rightfully idolized and receive privileges, credibility, and resources, while those on the bottom (out-groups) are demonized/dehumanized and/or bound by restrictions, scrutiny, and lack of resources.
To them, the second-greatest injustice imaginable is for those \[they perceive to be\] on top \[of social hierarchy\] to be bound by the restrictions, scrutiny, and lack of resources reserved for those on the bottom. The first greatest injustice is for those on the bottom to have access to the rights, credibility, and resources reserved for those on top.
Conservatives absolutely need an underclass \[for society\] to demonize and dehumanize in order to maintain \[their\] hierarchy, and every single one of their policies and rhetoric work to do exactly that. Unless the accusation is one of disrespecting hierarchy, every right-wing accusation is a confession -- every. single. one; always! -- as it is never the act itself that upsets them, but rather, the social standing of the person doing the act, as said act is a privilege meant for those on top of \[their perceived\] hierarchy (See also: pedophilia - Trump and the Catholic church versus LGBTQ+ and drag queens; protests - January 6th vs. BLM and No Kings; parental rights - anti-LGBTQ+ vs pro-LGBTQ+; indoctrination - religion vs. education).
Those who believe all people are people see hypocrisy, while those who believe some people are "more/less" people than others see hierarchy. Hypocrisy implies a sense of equality/parity, as the accusation of such is that someone is violating a universal or common standard. Hierarchy directly states that there is no equality/parity, that different social strata have different standards, that the only universal standard concerning hierarchy is that those on top are allowed privileges which are denied to those on the bottom, and that the bottom are held to standards which the top are exempt from.
"Know your place" is their mantra.
Well said
I've always said that the core tenet of conservatism is exclusion. I appreciate you putting that into greater, more detailed words. I will definitely be using the framing of this comment in the future.
Make it a point to ask conservatives what they're interested in conserving.
Exactly! It’s not about agreeing with someone politically cause nobody deserves to be physically attracted for their beliefs. You can disagree with someone without resorting to violence
I subscribe to the Indiana Jones school of political violence.
Debate Vigorously. Punch Nazis.
As the great Robert Evans of Behind the Bastards loves to say "ABPN, Always Be Punching Nazis"
Words to live by.
That's why this post feels strange to me. The issue is not that someone was assaulted at one person or another's rally. The issue is that someone was assaulted for saying "Release the Epstein Files". I'd hope if someone stood up at a Tallarico rally, Nazi saluted, and shouted "Heil Trump, heil dem Vierten Reich" sorta like Richard Spencer, that they'd get clocked swiftly (like Richard Spencer) regardless of their gender.
Not according to MAGA, apparently.
Well they are the Nazi in this situation
I wish I was physically attracted for my beliefs...
Egged on by the fucking president of the free world
free world? Ain't nothing in the united states free and that especially includes freedum
Funny of you to assume the children attending Trump rallies are 'men.'
Or that assaulting women is seen as bad by Republicans
This happened in Ohio. You couldnt do us the dignity of shouting out one of our Ohio Democrat candidates?
But they'll keep telling us all how dangerous Democrats and Liberals are.
VOTE BLUE!
The bare minimum standard in society keeps getting lower each and every day....
Fascists hit women at conventions and more news at 11
People also don't go into meltdown mode at the thought of releasing the Epstein files.
I don’t think anybody at all gets punched in the face at their rallies. I 100% know that neither of those men, or any Democrat, would ever suggest their audience punch protesters, either.
Not so at magat rallies, that audience is encouraged to beat up people with opposing views, and they’re protected and rewarded when they do.
There is a world of difference between magats and, well, anybody else. Magats are vile.
People also get talked to with understanding, respect, and kindness. That in and of itself should tell people something, but they're so far gone it's like they can't even wrap their heads around it.
It’s as if MAGATs are….deplorable
Its beyond comprehension that the woman who was assaulted was removed but the jackasses that did it were cheered and allowed to stay.
Really shows Rump's true views on women. And yet so many MAGA women defend him and his policies still
People also don't get assassinated at El-Sayed and Talarico rallies.
Really love where we're going humanity.. good job
Read-only thread. Why there is no reply box →