WTF? (**NSFW**)

[di1630]

Veteran's Affairs actually put this memo out.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[uhhello]

They rescinded it a few days later after it made the public 🙂

I go to a giant VA center for my care.  The average age is about 65 years old.  I can just imagine some poor worker taking down that photo in front of a few of them and explaining why.  

Edited March 6, 2024 by uhhello

[HeloDude]

3 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

You know, it's getting so cliche in shows/flick when 2 male characters that have zero developed back story and no stereotype behaviors, all of the sudden just start macking and sexing.  Today, I'm shocked if it turns out all the dudes in a show are just regular joes.

Southpark nailed that shit with their Disney Woke Pandaverse episode.

Did you watch “The Last of Us” on HBO?  There was a love story episode of two dudes, an episode of a blissful/thriving town where everyone is happy and working together (during the apocalypse) who were self proclaimed communists, and the only show focusing on religion was about a self proclaimed white Christian/pastor who raped juvenile women and who also had no problem killing people in his town for food (cannibalism).
 

And if you’re a fan of the show “Fargo” on FX/Hulu, the last season was very much trying to depict that if you’re a white guy, you’re most likely either silly, dumb, weak, or extremely abusive and violent, and that the bad people are the local Sheriff’s department.  Oh and the local abusive Sheriff believes in small government, helps arm their local militia, and are also Christian Trump supporters…and that the Feds are always the good people and women are the smart/tough ones and the heroes.

I’m so glad that Hollywood isn’t trying to push an agenda.

[Smokin]

But it's ok, you don't need guns because those local bad guy police will protect you... oh dang, that makes no sense.

[Danger41]

Do the types of people who do this genuinely think they are helping the cause with moves like this? Not too long ago it was just about “equality” and now…sheesh. 

[TreeA10]

5 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Do the types of people who do this genuinely think they are helping the cause with moves like this? Not too long ago it was just about “equality” and now…sheesh. 

I've wondered the same thing.  I've also considered that these people go through life in a constant state of self induced misery and want to drag down rest of humanity to join them in that pit of unhappiness.  Or possibly, they have imagined themselves marginalized and must extract revenge on their perceived oppressors.  Maybe both.

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, TreeA10 said:

I've wondered the same thing.  I've also considered that these people go through life in a constant state of self induced misery and want to drag down rest of humanity to join them in that pit of unhappiness.  Or possibly, they have imagined themselves marginalized and must extract revenge on their perceived oppressors.  Maybe both.

Are we just talking about the random people who make these movies and shows?

 

I think overwhelmingly the people involved with these movements are not true believers, they're just regular people, slightly below average in intellect and well below average on the assertiveness scale, who just look for a movement or ideal to attach to and do so. They were never "social justice warriors" when it was risky or uncomfortable to be one (pre-1960), but now you get all sorts of "likes" and back-patting for changing your profile picture to a black square, so that's what some of the sheep are doing now, including writing shitty TV episodes that are "woke."

 

The right has them too. They are very conservative now that conservatism means nothing in the Big-R Republican party. Cut spending? Yeah sure, but not any of the spending people are actually used to (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, military). Pro police? Hell yeah! But don't raise my taxes to fund them. Get rid of the homeless? Finally! But I'm not going to support government funded mental asylums to house them...

 

It's also why I don't see a real civil war in the US anytime remotely soon. Most of the most vocal partisans will vaporize the moment their beliefs and positions put them at risk.

 

I was seduced into the ideology.

I didn't realize what "the leaders" really meant!

*I'm* the victim of a cult.

I never really believed that in the first place!

More likely we will be pulled into a World War of sorts, and the deaths of our young will have a focusing effect on the population. After the first couple judges or politicians or activists are beaten to death in the street for saying something stupid, the rest will fall in line quickly and without protest. That's just what sheep do.

I'm not looking forward to it, but there will be some silver linings.
 

[BFM this]

44 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

I think overwhelmingly the people involved with these movements are not true believers, they're just regular people, slightly below average in intellect and well below average on the assertiveness scale, who just look for a movement or ideal to attach to and do so.

An understandable hypothesis, but not so fast...

"I would rather be governed by the first 1000 people listed in the telephone directory, than by the Harvard University faculty."  -Wm F. Buckley

What on earth was he getting at?  Examining one of the most vivid examples, take a look at the rise (and fall) of the Third Reich.  The thought leaders driving that movement weren't the disenfranchised plebes, not by a long shot: it was the intelligentsia, the intellectual elite, PhDs, professors, doctors, lawyers--they were the ones nodding along to the rail cars, "showers", and brutal empire building.

Same thing is germinating today, on University campuses, hospital systems, corporate governing boards.

[Biff_T]

16 hours ago, di1630 said:

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

She or He (not sure what to call it) looks like a young Jabba the Hutt.

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, BFM this said:

An understandable hypothesis, but not so fast...

"I would rather be governed by the first 1000 people listed in the telephone directory, than by the Harvard University faculty."  -Wm F. Buckley

What on earth was he getting at?  Examining one of the most vivid examples, take a look at the rise (and fall) of the Third Reich.  The thought leaders driving that movement weren't the disenfranchised plebes, not by a long shot: it was the intelligentsia, the intellectual elite, PhDs, professors, doctors, lawyers--they were the ones nodding along to the rail cars, "showers", and brutal empire building.

Same thing is germinating today, on University campuses, hospital systems, corporate governing boards.

Yeah except for fundamentally there's a key difference. The universities are teaching the citizenship that they themselves are the enemy of the cause.

 

The third Reich did not teach that german-born German citizens were the fundamental roadblock to Utopia. They picked a minority internal demographic, and larger external demographics to villainize.

 

The force of the modern progressive movement in America, for better or worse, is fueled by well-off white liberals. They will happily preach and post about an ideology that paints themselves as victimizers, oppressors, and tyrants, so long is nothing actually comes of it. "Virtue signaling" is the most appropriate term.

 

However if that glorious day comes that the progressive movement is ready to act on their nonsense, it will require the sacrifice of it's largest support base.

 

Not going to happen. All those upper middle class, well-to-do white ladies are Republicans the day the revolution starts. And half of their husbands who provide for their privileged lives by exploiting the evils of capitalisms are already silent conservatives; they just have no inclination to scream about politics with their ignorant partners.

Edited March 6, 2024 by Lord Ratner

[Smokin]

One problem with assuming that it isn't going to happen is the baseline assumption that removing the support from the bottom of the structure will make it all topple down.  Once a movement gets started, it can grow capable of sustaining itself.  And the "oppressed" minorities will soon be the majority.  A 51% even spread of voters can do whatever they want.

[Danger41]

Air dropped food to Gaza not good because it’s not Halal. Luckily the JDAMs are kosher.

[SocialD]

Must not be that hungry if you're worried about it not being Halal.

[Clark Griswold]

Yeah except for fundamentally there's a key difference. The universities are teaching the citizenship that they themselves are the enemy of the cause.
 
The third Reich did not teach that german-born German citizens were the fundamental roadblock to Utopia. They picked a minority internal demographic, and larger external demographics to villainize.
 
The force of the modern progressive movement in America, for better or worse, is fueled by well-off white liberals. They will happily preach and post about an ideology that paints themselves as victimizers, oppressors, and tyrants, so long is nothing actually comes of it. "Virtue signaling" is the most appropriate term.
 
However if that glorious day comes that the progressive movement is ready to act on their nonsense, it will require the sacrifice of it's largest support base.
 
Not going to happen. All those upper middle class, well-to-do white ladies are Republicans the day the revolution starts. And half of their husbands who provide for their privileged lives by exploiting the evils of capitalisms are already silent conservatives; they just have no inclination to scream about politics with their ignorant partners.

Our bored, spoiled, decadent, hypocritical elites are weather vanes
If the world / our countries turn expect them to switch their allegiances quickly

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submission_(novel

Satirical novel but plausible given the modern lefts maniacal myopia for power over the traditional right coupled with willful delusion about working with the enemy of civilization


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smokin]

It is also amazing that a people group that is apparently under constant genocide by a nation-state with a relatively decent military somehow grows in population.  Maybe the meaning of the word genocide has changed since I went to school.

[TreeA10]

Genocide, man , woman, peaceful demonstration, border control....... Yep, definitions keep changing.  I'm wondering if I need to start using Google Translate for what I thought was the English language. Maybe English 10 years ago to current English.

[Biff_T]

14 hours ago, TreeA10 said:

Genocide, man , woman, peaceful demonstration, border control....... Yep, definitions keep changing.  I'm wondering if I need to start using Google Translate for what I thought was the English language. Maybe English 10 years ago to current English.

Google is in on it as well.  

[Biff_T]

I'm not sure the wokes (intentionally plural) know what they want.   They appear to spout nonsense just to make normal humans mad.  Like children.  It's complete insanity to believe what they're pushing.  History will not be kind to them.  They are a cult of fat chicks.  Nothing more.  

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, Biff_T said:

I'm not sure the wokes (intentionally plural) know what they want.   They appear to spout nonsense just to make normal humans mad.  Like children.  It's complete insanity to believe what they're pushing.  History will not be kind to them.  They are a cult of fat chicks.  Nothing more.  

I know exactly what they want. Meaning and money.

 

They spent decades fighting the good fight, and the cause was righteous. Problem is, eventually they ran out of victims. Now the people who made their living as professional activists when activists were needed (Al Sharpton, Gloria Steinem, etc) are facing economic doom if the battle is over, and the younger progressives grew up believing they would carry the torch, only to reach adulthood prepared for a war that already ended.

 

It benefits both groups to "find" victims, mentally and financially, so that's exactly what they do. But the only people you can inaccurately cast as victims are the mentally broken, and so we see the "homeless" drug addicts, those with gender dysmorphia, women who confabulate ridiculous fantasies of sexual abuse (e.g. the Kavanaugh accuser), men who are attracted to children, all become the oppressed.

 

It's not because any of these activists actually care about these "victims;" they want fame and money and found a way to get it.

[HeloDude]

Yep…the progressives are going after your kids.

 

[gearhog]

2 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Yep…the progressives are going after your kids.

 

Maybe hard to believe, but I may have an unpopular opinion on this. Raising my kids was the most incredibly difficult thing I've done.  I was working an airline job and guard job to include TDYs, deployments, etc while trying to be a decent father. The amount of thought and mental churning it took to anticipate, recognize, and mitigate all the potential pitfalls in a modern child's (especially girl's) life often seemed overwhelming. I have a very strong wife and immediate/exteneded family who live nearby. Fortunately, we were able to shape these young ones into an even better version of ourselves. Now there's another generation beginning and he's starting life with an even bigger advantage and more people to help guide him.

You can't remove the danger from a child's life, but you can prepare them to confront it. That takes an extraordinary effort today. Those countless hours at the dinner table, sitting next to them on the bed talking, sitting on bleachers until my ass was numb, Googling calculus answers, etc, was painful, but a family legacy is the most important thing to me.

I can't imagine attempting to concern myself the children of others to the extent that I care about mine. That's their job and so many are failing. If a family or society fails to produce mentally and physically fit young people who are wholly unable to produce the strong family dynamic required to go forth and multiply, those people eventually cease to exist. All I have to do is wait. I'lll help where I can, but I am under no obligation to drag the weak through life. If your child succumbs to these dangers, where does the responsibility lie? With the things you can't control (danger) or the things you can (preparation)? If you're someone who becomes conflicted about who you are and believe you need to change your body, I support whatever makes you happy. The chances of you outlasting my family and friends are slim.

 

[HeloDude]

6 hours ago, gearhog said:

If you're someone who becomes conflicted about who you are and believe you need to change your body, I support whatever makes you happy. The chances of you outlasting my family and friends are slim.

I don’t think young children have the mental ability to determine what’s going on in their bodies so much that a medical provider believes they should be given puberty blockers or be mutilated.  I believe then that these vulnerable children should be protected as much as possible.  There’s plenty of things we don’t allow children to do just because they want to…and yet with this issue, we have adults (both parents and medical providers) pushing  these children to desire such things.  It’s unbelievable.

Once they’re an adult and can do anything else legally (to include drink alcohol) then sure, they can do whatever they want.  This is about protecting young children from those who wish to harm them.

[Smokin]

If my adult neighbor drank a full bottle of jack every night, I'd try to convince him not to and help him out of his situation, but at the end of the day it's his choice and I can't stop him.

If my neighbor's 12 year old kid drank a bottle of jack every night with the encouragement of their parents and doctor, that is child abuse.  The parents and doctor should go to jail and the kid should be placed in a foster family where they have a chance at life.  Life altering surgeries because they have been pushed into or allowed to continue in a mental delusion is no different.

[jrizzell]

If you're someone who becomes conflicted about who you are and believe you need to change your body, I support whatever makes you happy. The chances of you outlasting my family and friends are slim.
 


There are states that you can’t get a tattoo under the age of 18, even with parental consent. As a serious nation, if we allowing children to determine whether they’re a boy or a girls, we have failed our youth.

My oldest boy loved Black Panther, wore costume everyday. I didn’t say “well time to move to Wakanda” he knows who he is. The hard part of being a parent is saying no and protecting them. Not allowing children to proceed down a path with life altering outcomes.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[gearhog]

36 minutes ago, Smokin said:

If my adult neighbor drank a full bottle of jack every night, I'd try to convince him not to and help him out of his situation, but at the end of the day it's his choice and I can't stop him.

If my neighbor's 12 year old kid drank a bottle of jack every night with the encouragement of their parents and doctor, that is child abuse.  The parents and doctor should go to jail and the kid should be placed in a foster family where they have a chance at life.  Life altering surgeries because they have been pushed into or allowed to continue in a mental delusion is no different.

That's kind of my point. What is the goal of preventing gender affirming care? Are we creating better people? They're likely to be a dreg of society with or without a penis. Any legislation on gender affirming care addresses the end result of harmful or neglectful parenting and social norms, not the destructive conditions that lead to mental illness.

So now if you want to address the root causes, you have to create nanny state laws that allow for seizure of kids from homes and laws that prevent exposure to whatever the state deems dangerous. I don't like that either.

The people who are least equipped (and being raised) to deal with modern life are self-sterilizing and effectively ending their genetic lineage.  And... they're happy to do it.  And... likely willing to become angry/violent if not allowed. Who are we to deny their pursuit of happiness? Why not let it play out? I'm willing to speak with your neighbor's kid  and list all the reasons why he shouldn't touch the hot stove, but if he still want's to.... It's not on me. It's on his parents.

What I am against, is any sort of outside funding. Do what you want, but not with my taxes or insurance premiums. If the parents have to work overtime for months on end to have their kid's tits chopped off, I think the whole dynamic might change.

Edited March 12, 2024 by gearhog