Topic: Why Do You Bow Down To The Feminist Liberal Agenda?

Anonymous A started this discussion 2 years ago #115,746

There Is A Massive Problem In This Country And If You Believe In This Bull Shit Then You Should Leave!

Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 6 minutes later[^] [v] #1,278,652

Mostly because it's easier to get laid that way.

boof joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 5 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,707

which feminist liberal agenda specifically, and can you name their official spokesman and outline the agenda in brief?

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 31 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,725

@previous (boof)

> which feminist liberal agenda specifically, and can you name their official spokesman and outline the agenda in brief?

Kook

Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 21 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,745

@previous (A)
While I don't see being liberal as a negative thing, I feel like incels fantasize about the idea that I'm very liberal

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 6 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,752

@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Define liberal

Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 years ago, 16 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,760

@previous (E)
I think that the people who call me liberal should probably be the ones to define it

Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 31 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,774

@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
But you just said you were very liberal. Define liberal.

Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,778

@1,278,760 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Ok, but I'm asking you what you meant. What did you mean when you said
> I don't see being liberal as a negative thing

Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,779

@1,278,774 (F)
No I didn't, learn to read

Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 59 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,802

@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Haha. Good one! You got 'em!

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,841

@1,278,745 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Are these incels in the room with us right now, Kook?

Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 years ago, 10 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,842

@previous (A)
Are the liberal feminists in the room with us right now?

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,844

@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
You.

Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 2 years ago, 12 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,850

@previous (A)
And the incel is you, sweetie

Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,854

@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Haha. Good one! You got 'em!

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 9 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,857

@1,278,850 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I'm Volcel actually.

dw !p9hU6ckyqw joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 5 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,891

i like it

Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 23 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,895

@1,278,707 (boof)
That's the defense of millions of militant femmes on twitter.

it's not a good defense. if any organization refuses to appoint a spokesperson, it's a cop out from dialectics. Full immunity from having to outline their beliefs, or be accountable for spouting nonsense because they refuse to have a civilized discussion to begin with. It's about plausible deniability on their part, because defending a coherent thesis was never the goal. social pressure and institutional sanctions are the goal, enforcing conformity. Getting philosophical would backfire on them.

Being against dialectics is a core feminist principle.

boof replied with this 2 years ago, 11 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,898

@previous (H)

> That's the defense of millions of militant femmes on twitter.
>
> it's not a good defense. if any organization refuses to appoint a spokesperson, it's a cop out from dialectics. Full immunity from having to outline their beliefs, or be accountable for spouting nonsense because they refuse to have a civilized discussion to begin with. It's about plausible deniability on their part, because defending a coherent thesis was never the goal. social pressure and institutional sanctions are the goal, enforcing conformity. Getting philosophical would backfire on them.
>
> Being against dialectics is a core feminist principle.

what are even talking about

Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 38 seconds later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,900

@previous (boof)
they're on the weed again

Anonymous H replied with this 2 years ago, 28 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,917

@1,278,898 (boof)
A mass of people who share an opinion don't appoint a spokesperson, so none of it is real, none of it can be critiqued.

boof replied with this 2 years ago, 22 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,928

@previous (H)
so you are saying this talk of an agenda is bullshit? why are you angry with me then and not the fellow who put forward the idea?

Anonymous H replied with this 2 years ago, 8 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,932

@previous (boof)
The agenda is real, and justified by pointing to their own disorganization.

boof replied with this 2 years ago, 13 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,942

@previous (H)
did the agenda appear out of nothing, authorless?

Anonymous H replied with this 2 years ago, 8 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,950

@previous (boof)
No, it arose out of a consensus among feminists.

(Edited 11 seconds later.)

boof replied with this 2 years ago, 4 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,953

@previous (H)
they had a meeting then
what did they conclude

Anonymous H replied with this 2 years ago, 3 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,955

@previous (boof)
I can't sum up the entirety of feminist consensus, and it was more than one meeting.

boof replied with this 2 years ago, 11 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,960

@previous (H)
so there was an agenda, I hear

Anonymous H replied with this 2 years ago, 5 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,278,962

@previous (boof)
Yes.

boof replied with this 2 years ago, 10 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,279,036

@previous (H)
hey swell

Minichan