Well I was planning to oppress women, but the bloke out of Rizzle Kicks say it's bad

[Burney]

:hehe:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/23/toxic-masculinity-men-privilege-emotions-rizzle-kicks

Seriously, will this lunacy ever fûcking end?

[Pat Vegas]

:hehe:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/23/toxic-masculinity-men-privilege-emotions-rizzle-kicks

Seriously, will this lunacy ever fûcking end?

I think I will get back on a plane and **** off.

First thing I did when I got home is remove any English news nonsense from my phone.

[Sir C]

:hehe:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/23/toxic-masculinity-men-privilege-emotions-rizzle-kicks

Seriously, will this lunacy ever fûcking end?

Nope. It's gone too far. Lunacy is now mainstream. People chant Jeremy Corbyn's name. Men might be women. The police paint their cars gay.

Please God send a flood and wash the filth away. Amen.

[Burney]

I think I will get back on a plane and **** off.

First thing I did when I got home is remove any English news nonsense from my phone.

Increasingly, f, we don't have news so much as we have people arguing with one another in public masquerading as news.

Obviously we get the odd bit of proper news like Grenfell or a terrorist outrage, but most of the rest of it seems to be people posturing.

[Burney]

Nope. It's gone too far. Lunacy is now mainstream. People chant Jeremy Corbyn's name. Men might be women. The police paint their cars gay.

Please God send a flood and wash the filth away. Amen.

Someone really needs to get hold of the police by the scruff of the neck and kick their arses from Land's End to John O'Groats.

They seem to think it's their job to be friendly and non-threatening when the reverse is clearly the case.

[Pat Vegas]

Increasingly, f, we don't have news so much as we have people arguing with one another in public masquerading as news.

Obviously we get the odd bit of proper news like Grenfell or a terrorist outrage, but most of the rest of it seems to be people posturing.

What I don't like is for example last night I had newsflash of a siege in a bowling alley. I quickly was annoyed when I found out it wasn't allans and I had wasted my time clicking on it.

[Burney]

Nope. It's gone too far. Lunacy is now mainstream. People chant Jeremy Corbyn's name. Men might be women. The police paint their cars gay.

Please God send a flood and wash the filth away. Amen.

Yeah. Actually, you're right. :-(

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/23/uk-lobbies-for-trans-rights-in-un-treaty-but-allows-contentious-pregnant-women-term

[Peter]

:hehe:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/23/toxic-masculinity-men-privilege-emotions-rizzle-kicks

Seriously, will this lunacy ever fûcking end?

What a ****.....

[Burney]

What a ****.....

Well quite. It doesn't help my view of his witterings that he recently appeared on Celebrity Bear Grylls Island (or whatever it's called) and revealed himself to be a lazy, selfish, entitled, spoilt little prick in urgent need of a solid right-hander.

[Ash]

Well quite. It doesn't help my view of his witterings that he recently appeared on Celebrity Bear Grylls Island (or whatever it's called) and revealed himself to be a lazy, selfish, entitled, spoilt little prick in urgent need of a solid right-hander.

You watch that stuff?

[Burney]

You watch that stuff?

It was on straight after bake-off and featured Iwan Thomas revealing himself to be the thickest man on the planet :shrug:

I’m not proud, a. I’ll watch any old shīte if I’m honest.

[Ash]

I’m not proud, a. I’ll watch any old shīte if I’m honest.

Fair enough. It's not pride that leads me to avoid such content, but fear of excruciating discomfort.

[Peter]

Well quite. It doesn't help my view of his witterings that he recently appeared on Celebrity Bear Grylls Island (or whatever it's called) and revealed himself to be a lazy, selfish, entitled, spoilt little prick in urgent need of a solid right-hander.

I think the phrase 'solid right hander' might mean something else these days.

Anyone who utters the phrase toxic masculinity is a complete and utter ****.

[SWv2]

The world is fúcked when a Rizzle Kick is lecturing other people via the medium of The Guardian newspaper website.

[Ash]

The world is fúcked when a Rizzle Kick is lecturing other people via the medium of The Guardian newspaper website.

Who is this gentleman anyway? It could look it up, of course, but I need the AWIMB view so I can adjust my prejudices accordingly.

[Ash]

Anyone who utters the phrase toxic masculinity is a complete and utter ****.

Not long before the dialectic kicks into action and the antithesis of "toxic feminism" starts to circulate.

In fact, shall we start it? Shall we meme it up?

[Burney]

I think the phrase 'solid right hander' might mean something else these days.

Anyone who utters the phrase toxic masculinity is a complete and utter ****.

Apart from anything else, it contains a redundancy because what the users of the phrase actually mean is that masculinity in its commonly and historically understood sense is - by its very nature - toxic.

It's almost up there with 'mansplaining' in my shítlist of bullshít quasi-feminist terms.

IF YOU'RE WRONG AND I POINT IT OUT, LOVE, THAT'S NOT 'MANSPLAINING', IT'S 'EXPLAINING'! AND IT USUALLY HAS TO BE DONE BECAUSE YOU'RE A BIT THICK. ACCUSING ME OF 'MANSPLAINING' DOESN'T MAKE YOU ANY LESS WRONG OR ANY LESS THICK!

:furious: :shout: :furious: :shout:

[Burney]

Not long before the dialectic kicks into action and the antithesis of "toxic feminism" starts to circulate.

In fact, shall we start it? Shall we meme it up?

It already exists. They're called 'TERFs' (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists).

Basically, they're actual women who rather resent blokes in frocks rocking up and telling them what being a woman is all about.
Much, I imagine, as black people would react to a white bloke covered in boot polish explaining the black experience to them.

[Sir C]

Who is this gentleman anyway? It could look it up, of course, but I need the AWIMB view so I can adjust my prejudices accordingly.

From the evidence presented so far, he's a **** and no mistake.

[SWv2]

Who is this gentleman anyway? It could look it up, of course, but I need the AWIMB view so I can adjust my prejudices accordingly.

He is a singer as such, rapper perhaps more accurate or perhaps Grime or whatever. Sub grime.

They are both Arsenal supporters I think.

They're shíte obviously.

[Burney]

He is a singer as such, rapper perhaps more accurate or perhaps Grime or whatever. Sub grime.

They are both Arsenal supporters I think.

They're shíte obviously.

One of theirs used to come on my iPhone when I was running sometimes. Something about Humps. It was quite good to run to.

[Peter]

Apart from anything else, it contains a redundancy because what the users of the phrase actually mean is that masculinity in its commonly and historically understood sense is - by its very nature - toxic.

It's almost up there with 'mansplaining' in my shítlist of bullshít quasi-feminist terms.

IF YOU'RE WRONG AND I POINT IT OUT, LOVE, THAT'S NOT 'MANSPLAINING', IT'S 'EXPLAINING'! AND IT USUALLY HAS TO BE DONE BECAUSE YOU'RE A BIT THICK. ACCUSING ME OF 'MANSPLAINING' DOESN'T MAKE YOU ANY LESS WRONG OR ANY LESS THICK!

:furious: :shout: :furious: :shout:

That article is total and utter *******s from start to finish. Rambling nonsense. "Most men feel more comfortable killing themselves than acknowledging pain".....where the **** does he get that from? Total and utter ****!

The problem with this sort of **** is that it addresses masculinity from the feminist perspective, where women are oppressed and men are their oppressors. It therefore seeks to adjust masculinity as retribution- not in a constructive sense that realigns traditional gender roles but as a punishment, a reparation for years of oppression. Thus masculinity is realigned to suit feminism, men must be reconstructed in a way that suits women.

Well that is ****ing horse**** and, given the assumption that we are the evil agents of oppression, why would we agree to it?

The cancer at the heart of the last 30 years of feminism has been the narrative that men made the destruction of entrenched gender roles necessary. It ignores the fact that men are just as trapped in their entrenched roles and at no point has feminism acknowledged or tackled this. The inevitable consequence is a society of imbalance, as only one side of the balance is addressed.

If we are toxic it is because feminism poisoned us.

[Peter]

He is a singer as such, rapper perhaps more accurate or perhaps Grime or whatever. Sub grime.

They are both Arsenal supporters I think.

They're shíte obviously.

Its beyond that. They are some form of novelty act. A kind of urban/rappy version of the Darkness. Or Bob the Builder.

[SWv2]

One of theirs used to come on my iPhone when I was running sometimes. Something about Humps. It was quite good to run to.

Mama do the hump.

Each to their own B. You know me, as open minded as the next man.

You want to run listening to urban grime who the fúck am I to suggest you’re a wrong ‘un.

[Burney]

That article is total and utter *******s from start to finish. Rambling nonsense. "Most men feel more comfortable killing themselves than acknowledging pain".....where the **** does he get that from? Total and utter ****!

The problem with this sort of **** is that it addresses masculinity from the feminist perspective, where women are oppressed and men are their oppressors. It therefore seeks to adjust masculinity as retribution- not in a constructive sense that realigns traditional gender roles but as a punishment, a reparation for years of oppression. Thus masculinity is realigned to suit feminism, men must be reconstructed in a way that suits women.

Well that is ****ing horse**** and, given the assumption that we are the evil agents of oppression, why would we agree to it?

The cancer at the heart of the last 30 years of feminism has been the narrative that men made the destruction of entrenched gender roles necessary. It ignores the fact that men are just as trapped in their entrenched roles and at no point has feminism acknowledged or tackled this. The inevitable consequence is a society of imbalance, as only one side of the balance is addressed.

If we are toxic it is because feminism poisoned us.

Essentially, though, this is the nature of identity politics, isn't it? It must define the 'enemy' as evil in order to sustain itself. Thus, inevitably, the straight, white, anglophone male is absolutely at the bottom of the inverse pyramid that is identity politics and must abase himself and apologise abjectly for his very existence before even being allowed to speak.

Fùck 'em. I like being a straight, white anglophone male. They're all cünts.

[Burney]

Mama do the hump.

Each to their own B. You know me, as open minded as the next man.

You want to run listening to urban grime who the fúck am I to suggest you’re a wrong ‘un.

I think my daughter had downloaded it on my account, to be fair.

Is it grime? I thought grime was from Croydon. Like me and old Stormy or whatever he's called.

[SWv2]

I think my daughter had downloaded it on my account, to be fair.

Is it grime? I thought grime was from Croydon. Like me and old Stormy or whatever he's called.

Stormzy you will find. Skepta is grime also.

Stormy is what the weather was like last week in Ireland, Ophelia and the magnificently named Brian.

Yes, daughter, of course. Hmmmm!!

Small step from “it was my daughter who done it your honour” to “it was for research your honour”.


#townsend

[Peter]

Essentially, though, this is the nature of identity politics, isn't it? It must define the 'enemy' as evil in order to sustain itself. Thus, inevitably, the straight, white, anglophone male is absolutely at the bottom of the inverse pyramid that is identity politics and must abase himself and apologise abjectly for his very existence before even being allowed to speak.

Fùck 'em. I like being a straight, white anglophone male. They're all cünts.

Yes. Unfortunately, or perhaps through design, they raised a generation of women who are utterly self-centred and are unable to accept any form of accountability for their actions, preferring to play the victim.

It isn't a brilliant idea to raise people to believe that everything is someone else's fault.

The most irritating thing is that as a straight male you have to actually live with them. The gays dont know how lucky they are.

[Burney]

Stormzy you will find. Skepta is grime also.

Stormy is what the weather was like last week in Ireland, Ophelia and the magnificently named Brian.

Yes, daughter, of course. Hmmmm!!

Small step from “it was my daughter who done it your honour” to “it was for research your honour”.


#townsend

Interesting side note: For much of last week when people were saying what a shîte name for a storm Brian was and things like 'Whoever heard of a scary Brian?', I was busy referring them to Brian Boru and the Battle of Clontarf.

See? Doing my bit for Anglo-Irish understanding there.

[IUFG]

It isn't a brilliant idea to raise people to believe that everything is someone else's fault.

it genius tbf.

I shall now live my life by that rule.

I get confused reading the Guardian - which I only ever do from links posted on here.
They appear to espouse the defence of the muslamics and the feminism stuff; when quite clearly the two are polar opposites.

So, it is ok to repress women if your a muslim bloke. Is that right?

[Burney]

Yes. Unfortunately, or perhaps through design, they raised a generation of women who are utterly self-centred and are unable to accept any form of accountability for their actions, preferring to play the victim.

It isn't a brilliant idea to raise people to believe that everything is someone else's fault.

The most irritating thing is that as a straight male you have to actually live with them. The gays dont know how lucky they are.

I wouldn't mind being blamed for everything if I'd actually got to do a good amount of oppressing, tbh. But I'm not aware that I ever have. I've never been allowed to own slaves, run India, sell opium and guns to half the world, shoot Aborigines or red injuns or treat women like chattel.

Basically, we're paying for all the good stuff our forefathers got to do. Not fair imo.

[SWv2]

Interesting side note: For much of last week when people were saying what a shîte name for a storm Brian was and things like 'Whoever heard of a scary Brian?', I was busy referring them to Brian Boru and the Battle of Clontarf.

See? Doing my bit for Anglo-Irish understanding there.

He has a beer named after him of course. I think the accompanying "Notes/Commercial Description" given are particularly helpful to the curious drinker.

https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/26/16520/

[Burney]

it genius tbf.

I shall now live my life by that rule.

I get confused reading the Guardian - which I only ever do from links posted on here.
They appear to espouse the defence of the muslamics and the feminism stuff; when quite clearly the two are polar opposites.

So, it is ok to repress women if your a muslim bloke. Is that right?


Basically, yes. They'd prefer it if you did it on the down-low and got your missus to pretend she likes walking round looking like a funereal postbox, but basically they're happy for you to carry on oppressing.

[Peter]

I wouldn't mind being blamed for everything if I'd actually got to do a good amount of oppressing, tbh. But I'm not aware that I ever have. I've never been allowed to own slaves, run India, sell opium and guns to half the world, shoot Aborigines or red injuns or treat women like chattel.

Basically, we're paying for all the good stuff our forefathers got to do. Not fair imo.

Your forefathers would probably criticise you for allowing this to happen.

It all started with letting them vote, then letting them work during wars. Road to hell.....

[IUFG]

Basically, yes. They'd prefer it if you did it on the down-low and got your missus to pretend she likes walking round looking like a funereal postbox, but basically they're happy for you to carry on oppressing.

Wow. It is almost as if the paper is populated with self-righteous, hypocritical, hack wakners

[Peter]

Basically, yes. They'd prefer it if you did it on the down-low and got your missus to pretend she likes walking round looking like a funereal postbox, but basically they're happy for you to carry on oppressing.

At least it stops toxic males from leering at her.

[IUFG]

At least it stops toxic males from leering at her.

That too, is genius.

Why has no-one suggested the wearing of such items to all the ladies of the West?

[Ash]

That too, is genius.

Why has no-one suggested the wearing of such items to all the ladies of the West?

Ah, but that would be cultural appropriation.

[redgunamo]

Anyway, it used to be :-\



I wouldn't mind being blamed for everything if I'd actually got to do a good amount of oppressing, tbh. But I'm not aware that I ever have. I've never been allowed to own slaves, run India, sell opium and guns to half the world, shoot Aborigines or red injuns or treat women like chattel.

Basically, we're paying for all the good stuff our forefathers got to do. Not fair imo.

[redgunamo]

Essentially, though, this is the nature of identity politics, isn't it? It must define the 'enemy' as evil in order to sustain itself. Thus, inevitably, the straight, white, anglophone male is absolutely at the bottom of the inverse pyramid that is identity politics and must abase himself and apologise abjectly for his very existence before even being allowed to speak.

Fùck 'em. I like being a straight, white anglophone male. They're all cünts.

Well, quite. The dollies just want to join in with all the fun, I think.

[redgunamo]

That article is total and utter *******s from start to finish. Rambling nonsense. "Most men feel more comfortable killing themselves than acknowledging pain".....where the **** does he get that from? Total and utter ****!

The problem with this sort of **** is that it addresses masculinity from the feminist perspective, where women are oppressed and men are their oppressors. It therefore seeks to adjust masculinity as retribution- not in a constructive sense that realigns traditional gender roles but as a punishment, a reparation for years of oppression. Thus masculinity is realigned to suit feminism, men must be reconstructed in a way that suits women.

Well that is ****ing horse**** and, given the assumption that we are the evil agents of oppression, why would we agree to it?

The cancer at the heart of the last 30 years of feminism has been the narrative that men made the destruction of entrenched gender roles necessary. It ignores the fact that men are just as trapped in their entrenched roles and at no point has feminism acknowledged or tackled this. The inevitable consequence is a society of imbalance, as only one side of the balance is addressed.

If we are toxic it is because feminism poisoned us.

Men have clearly scored the victory in this though. Albeit a somewhat pyrrhic one.

[Burney]

Your forefathers would probably criticise you for allowing this to happen.

It all started with letting them vote, then letting them work during wars. Road to hell.....

To be fair, many of my forefathers wouldn’t have had the slightest idea what I was on about, since I was speaking English and wasn’t subsisting on potatoes.