Thread "Worst People in the World" in forum "Random Nonsense"

Posted at 10:06AM, Jun. 30, 2011

The best (worst?) part about Deve's list, is that no matter what you say about abortion, you will alway's be a rape-supporter. Pro-life, fuck you. Pro-choice, fuck you too.

Posted at 11:06AM, Jun. 30, 2011

Nah,D_Dude. If you think that abortion is good because it means more women will want to have sex with you, or just sex in general… then fuck you!

If you are pro-choice because you believe that a woman has a right to do with her body as she pleases, regardless of how much sex they may or may not have, then you are on the right track.

Actually, if you are pro-choice for almost any reason other than the one about women having more sex… then you get out of it.

That seems to be what she is saying.

Posted at 4:06PM, Jun. 30, 2011

If you post on this forum, you are a rape supporter.
If you don't post on here you are also a rape supporter.
Why do you all keep encouraging so much rape?
You should all be ashamed.

Posted at 7:06PM, Jun. 30, 2011

***WARNING: RANT :WARNING***

I've got a whole group of people who are among the worst!

Goddamned neighbors who turn the music at their party up louder as the night progresses, and when that get's boring they have drunken karaoke until the police show up. Every single weekend for 2 months straight.

How can you tell your parties should tone it down a few notches? When the people a mile away are lodging complaints.

Those people ought to get shot with a ball of their own shit.

Posted at 8:06PM, Jun. 30, 2011

Hark. Yes, I suppose that sums up my problem with the Rape supporting thing. It ends up meaning very little. Yet, there are several good points worth considering in that list.

For example. I've got nothing against pornography if the participants made the choice willingly. Making the decision themselves, etc. But, if the participants were forced into it then the watchers are basically watching rape. I'm not entirely certain the epidemic of forced participation in porn/strip clubs/etc is quite what Deve says, but… it is still worth considering.

For the record, a woman deciding to go into the profession to make money… doesn't quite count as forcing her to do so. When it comes to drug addiction or EXTREME poverty it does count, in a way.

Prostitution? Similar, but using a prostitute (and using is the proper word here I think) who has been forced into her situation and is being exploited… actually makes the user complicit in rape.

That all being said, if someone is not forced into it I've got no problem with it. So the question becomes, is the problem with prostitution/porn/strip clubs inherent to the thing, or inherent to something else and the thing can be fixed? I think there are problems elsewhere. For example, if it was law to line up human traffickers against a wall and shoot them in the stomach… maybe it would slow the problems down. See, this is one of the reasons that putting me in charge of a nation would be… problematic.

Ahem. Renard.

Well, if you were a really vindictive person you could do one of two things.

One: Egg the house after the party when everyone is hung over. That would be a waste of good eggs though. Unless you make sure the eggs are rotten…

Two: In the morning after the big party, when everyone there has a nasty hangover, rent a marching band. Include bagpipers if at all possible. Then, march them up and down the front of the house.

Or, just get a megaphone and shout at the house all morning from the back of a truck. That way, if they try to chase you, you can get away quickly.

Just make sure that it happens ever day after the party, every weekend if you must.

But you could also be forgiving and tolerant and let them keep going. Or you could contact the police ahead of time, and warn them that if they don't make it stop you will do just as described above. It might motivate the authorities.

Posted at 5:07AM, Jul. 1, 2011

I agree, it all depends upon will participation or not. To say nothing of that option would either mean that it doesn't exist (which it does) or that women are confused and don't really want to do those things (but they do anyway since they don't have the guiding hand of a feminist protecting them).

Are we letting the traffickers go to the hospital after we shoot them? If they live then they'll just continue to conduct business. The best way to deal with traffickers (of weapons, drugs, people, etc.) is to damage their ability to make money, to make it more costly and dangerous to conduct business.

And I had enjoyed a bit too much schnapps at the time I posted that last comment, so it was a tossup between calling the police, gatecrashing and "accidentally" setting the speakers on fire, or staggering over their in a gas mask with a fire ax (to frighten them off, mostly). I don't do "morning after", I like immediate and devastating results.

Posted at 7:07AM, Jul. 1, 2011

Yeah she makes a few valid points, but we are back in that "stopped clock is right twice a day" territory.
By that logic you could argue that racists are partially right becuase a country should have a workable immigration policy or that George Bush was partly right to invade Iraq becauyse we should take some action against terrorism.
Yes, technically they are right on those points, but they are minor details in the grand scheme of how horrifyingly, brain meltingly wrong they are overall!
The point of her post was not to make valid points about sexism in ourculture or the exploitation of vulnerable women by the sex industry.
It was to express her hatred for men and (inadvertantly) her own astounding stupidity.

This topic is far more popular than I anticipated. I need to hurry up and add more candidates!

Posted at 12:07AM, Jul. 19, 2011

No no Renard. The Trafficers don't get to go to hospital. I've heard that a bullet to the stomach is one of the slowest and most painful ways to die.
Violent of me? Absolutely. As bad as Deve? No. Deve basically marks an entire group as bad for no real link to individual responsibility. I classify according to individual actions. The punishment one receives should be equal to the direct harm one has done.
Hark. I'd say she has a point worth considering quite often, if not a point to accept entirely. She hates because, as it seems, she believes what she says. Her premises make it difficult to not hate. Her points are, to a degree, quite accurate, but when combined with her belief in class responsibility and chain reaction responsibility they bring hatred. The premises are the problem.
And therein is our problem. Deve is, from what I have read, quite rational and clear thinking in terms of her arguments when she does make them. She is not a blithering idiot. She is quite intelligent. If anything, her main flaw is that she doesn't always make her arguments clear. It is very very difficult to attack the premises of someone like this, as they are quite capable of turning the questions on to you. I did find myself thinking long and hard about her arguments. I have respect for her, as grudgingly as it came. That does, of course, make me pity her more.
It is like arguing with a creationist. There are plenty of very intelligent creationists out there, but the problems are the premises. And it is almost impossible to take out premises from an outside perspective. You have to show that those premises themselves lead to an inherent contradiction. You have to argue from their perspective, and sometimes even then they will not acknowedge. Another problem occurs when you cannot arrive at a contradiction via their premises. Example: "God can do anything" okay. Then I just can't prove a contradiction, can I? God can even make it look like he didn't do it while having done it! That doesn't mean those premises are correct, just that they technically work. Just because something logically follows doesn't make it true. It will only be true if premises are correct… and… problem.