Denver Post article refers to sexual assault victims

Never underestimate the ability of women to take self aggrandizement to the nest level

I’m a stubbed pinky toe “Survivor”

I'm a chocolate chip cookie survivor.

Do the nightmares ever stop???

quote:

---

This thought is not original, and I read it earlier:

We have effectively restrained and punished men's greatest weapon in society: violence against competitors.

We are also encouraging and not recognizing a woman's greatest weapon: social and emotional manipulation.

The latter is much less concrete and much more difficult to identify, but it exists as a means of exerting agency nonetheless.

---

That's actually a good way to put it.

A collision of biology and societal morality confusion

quote:

---

Victim just means you can file a complaint with the police. Survivor means you’re entitled to corner anyone anywhere and demand they agree with you about anything.

---

Membership has its privileges.

quote:

---

Do the nightmares ever stop???

---

Installing a second cookie jar has helped but I'm still afraid of cookie sheets. Even pizza pans give me the shakes. Just ask my old friend Leland Keyser.

quote:

---

Are you unfamiliar with the idea of multiple definitions for a word

---

yep, right on time. told ya liberals love ambiguity

"Phobia doesn't mean ONLY irrational fear - it can also simply mean hatred "

quote:

---

yep, right on time. told ya liberals love ambiguity

"Phobia doesn't mean ONLY irrational fear - it can also simply mean hatred "

---

The left does love ambiguity, and too often makes things ambiguous in a harmful way. But then the alternative problem are pretending that ambiguity is either made up or that something is being made ambiguous because there is more than one non-ambiguous meaning.

Then they get away with harmfully and meaningfully changing definitions. While people are fighting pointless battles over terms because despite being technically correct, they aren’t the most colloquial usage of a term, then less focus is on the changes that are worth fighting against. And they can use those pointless fights as a defense against the meaningful ones. And they use the ambiguity your arguing in the same way. A term that had a usage that has always been considered a polite compliment to a female, is now changed to mean harassment. But while the right is arguing about ambiguity of a term with multiple usages, they’re using terms that have multiple usages, into a single unambiguous usage that the right wants, but chooses to use it against them.

Similar thing with this whole idea of being able to attack “whites, males, Christians, conservatives, etc.” They can more easily get away with ridiculous attacks because they’re actual victims were too busy pretending to be victims because someone was banned in Twitter, or because someone changed Merry Christmas to Happy Holidays, or because some school district said their long-term goal was for their AP classes to be reflective of the diversity in their district.

The left does the same thing, but the my at least use situations that had a victim, and claim they’re victims by proxy, or create a scenario that would have a victim if true.

I don’t know if either side is smarter than the other. But since irrationality gets more focus, the left is a lot smarter at presenting their irrationality than the right. The problem is that the more rational people on both sides get caught up in the sides of the irrationality and reinforce it the rather than fighting against it altogether. And the right is losing because they’re fighting the wrong battle.

quote:

---

And the right is losing because they’re fighting the wrong battle.

---

Wrong. The right is winning, beating the leftist filth like a drum because of the vile tactics used by the left.

It's not about debate points, it's about results that are good for our country. Paid protestors who lie and chant buzzwords are not reflecting the sentiment of our country. They are trying to destroy it.

MAGA