Categories
Uncategorized

Violence, that isn’t what it means

A student at a Pittsburg university wrote about his school’s pronoun policy, denouncing it in an article on Red State. Here is the policy:

Any individual who has been informed of another person’s gender identity, pronouns, or chosen name is expected to respect that individual. Point Park University fosters a community of inclusivity for every member at the institution. Misgendering, continued misuse of an individual’s pronouns, or using an individual’s deadname after being informed of a chosen name could result in a violation of the Policy on Discrimination and Harassment for gender-based discrimination.

So if you call someone by their legal name you can be disciplined. If you use proper English, you will be disciplined. A pronoun is a word that takes the place of a noun. Pronouns exist so that you can refer to an object without having to name it. Having to learn and remember each person’s preferred and personal pronouns completely destroys the need for pronouns in the first place. Why not simply refer to everyone by name?

Still, the nutcases demand that we bow to their demands. Refusal to do so, according to them, is literally violence. Literally. If I refer to someone who looks like a woman by using the pronoun ‘she’- according to the insane left- I am committing a violent act which makes legitimate the use of force in self defense. Check out this clip to see what I mean:

They claim that this is because transgender women (men who claim to be women) who are also black have the highest rate of violence perpetuated against them. This is because of math. Since the number of black men who believe themselves to be women is so small, any act of violence against one of them has a disproportionate effect upon the RATE of violence.

If there are only two cats in my neighborhood, and one is struck by a car, the RATE of cats being struck is 50 percent. If there are 200 dogs in my neighborhood, and 90 of them are struck by cars, the RATE of dogs being struck is 45 percent. That doesn’t mean that cats are more likely to be struck by cars, it means that the one who was struck was a statistical anomaly.

Regardless, that wouldn’t give me the right, if I owned a cat, to declare that driving a car near my cat was an act of violence which allowed me to shoot everyone who drives a car near my house. This is why I remain so opposed to so-called hate crime laws. It should be illegal to commit an unprovoked assault upon another person. It shouldn’t matter WHY I committed the assault. That isn’t how “hate crimes” work. To declare that a person who assaults another because of some characteristic is somehow more heinous than a person who commits the assault for no reason at all is ridiculous and leads to one inevitable conclusion:

It allows any person who possesses that characteristic to use it as a cudgel to subjugate anyone with whom the disagree. “You only disagree with me because you are xxxphobic.” This is what the entire cancel culture has become- using some claimed characteristic as a sword with which to attack your enemies.

The problem here is that there is also only one possible outcome from the course that is being followed here- this all inevitably ends with real violence. One or both sides will eventually move to use actual violence to prevail and eliminate the other.

22 replies on “Violence, that isn’t what it means”

they want to take away free speech and guns…then they can punish you for saying anything they don’t agree with and you can’t fight back…it’s the last remaining goals to make us the commie country they desire…what’s funny is the loudest screaming voices will be the first to experience this when their utopia is not utopia they were promised…

Your last paragraph, couple of questions I have asked folks here and there.
Why do you see that as a problem? Really is this not just basic human behavior, to fight your enemies? They have after all on numerous occasions stated “we” are their enemies. I do not believe “they” will ever voluntarily stop, does anyone?? “They” have self-identified and to some extent clustered together.
Why not give “them” exactly what is needed?

Because a violent outcome isn’t going to be the story that so many envision. If only one side engages in violence, the result is genocide.
If more than one does, all sides will lose. Why?

Do you think that the Chinese, the Russians, the Muslims, and the rest of America’s enemies will sit idly by on the sidelines and watch, as if it were some sort of football game?

A second American civil war will be truly ugly. It won’t be some game where you go fight in the morning and spend the evening watching TV.

Do you have it in you to murder women and children? To massacre entire families? Could you torture another human by slicing him into pieces as he screams and begs for mercy? What about doing the same to his wife or kids? Are you willing to have your own children murdered or worse?

No? Then you don’t want the violence to start. This isn’t a movie.

I do not think “our” enemies are waiting.
I think they are diligently working every single day. Ugly civil war, oh you bet, no electrical grid for a couple years will cull many folks on its own. Add in the complications and I think you know.
We were taught not to murder
Enemy combatants however
As for the last bit about “or worse”
Already have the T-shirt on that one.

Bwahahaha! Apparently you don’t know bert like I do! Women and children of the radicals are just a speed bump. He would use the family pet as flavoring for the human tartare to serve with crackers and wine. I’m just glad Bert’s on our side. If that makes you queezy or offends as being barbaric then I suggest you stay on the porch clutching your bible till the purge comes to a resolution.

What is the solution then, more talk and discussion? Attempting to reason with people who have not reached their positions through reason? How has that worked out so far and why would I think it would be different next time?

If you truly believed that, you wouldn’t be on this website. You would be out stacking bodies.

Believed what? I’m asking you a sincere question.

If someone physically attacks me because they perceive words to be violence, it is to my benefit to respond in kind is it not?

Are you saying there is no difference in ‘responding’ to an attack as opposed to ‘initiating’ an attack?

Repeating the RFI posted 4Jan22 1456 hours.
Doubly sincere on wanting to hear any reasonable answer instead of off track where we seems to be headed.

Responding to an imminent threat wasn’t the original question. I will and always have supported defending me and mine from attacks.
The original question was why haven’t we kicked off CW2. Here is what I was responding to:
“Why do you see that as a problem? Really is this not just basic human behavior, to fight your enemies? They have after all on numerous occasions stated “we” are their enemies. I do not believe “they” will ever voluntarily stop, does anyone?? “They” have self-identified and to some extent clustered together.
Why not give “them” exactly what is needed?”

My answer to that remains the same. I am not one of those Internet badasses who is dreaming of starting or fighting a war on our streets. It would be a disaster for all of us, and trust me when I say that no one is going to be the Rambo of their story like so many on both sides seem to believe.
A Civil War in this nation will be BRUTAL and will likely result in other nations like China getting involved. It would also likely end with you and at at least some of: your wife, your kids, your family, and friends dead. Bluster all you want, but things are not yet bad enough for me to think standing over the bodies of my dead grandkids is a better alternative than they way things are now.
If any of you REALLLY believed CW2 would be a good thing wouldn’t be sitting here running your mouths. You would be out there doing it.

Where have you been, Diver? The leftists violence has been escalating for several years now, search on violence rates for all leftist cities/counties/states. Are you saying you aren’t willing to reply to an attack on you or yours? Not good odds on that, read up on Patton.

An attack, yes. But sitting here in some sort of wanna be fantasy version of cowboys and indians as I wish for CW2? No thanks

Why not give “them” exactly what is needed?

I have been informed privately that this is where my words failed. This was never intended to be understood as “a call to arms”.
I should of instead keyed in “at some point in time, might it not be necessary to give them that which “they” ask for”
My apologies

You are correct in that. I just don’t think we are there yet. Once that switch gets flipped, the life you have is over and will never return.
I don’t know about you, but my life is a good one. I love my friends and family. It will take some pretty egregious acts to make me give that up.

Bert, it’s interesting that you came back with this because I did not take your original statement to be some “call to arms”. I took it to mean that you called a woman a ‘she’ and she attacked you. She attacks you, you defend yourself, she ends up dying in the exchange. I have no problem with that.

Divemedic, I’m not sure if the “bluster” line was meant for me but I have not engaged in any bluster, nor did I say anything about CW2. I don’t disagree with your statements regarding the ugliness that is coming. It WILL be ugly and horrible and tragic. But it IS coming. I know this because I read history. However, stating the obvious does not mean I ‘want’ it to happen.

I feel like we’re seeing the effects of the “time-out” generation and need to go back to the tried and true corporal punishment that most of us were raised from that taught us morals and respect for others and their property. Though the vast majority of offenders now are past bending over a knee or going in circles so more drastic measures are needed to learn the same lessons. I’m sure many of WTP would be more than happy to send a lesson plan package that would far outpace the fastest Amazon delivery truck to make our point if the natives in the immediate AO go full bananas like in the inner city shitholes. But then again, maybe it’s just wishful thinking.

As I see it, we will ultimately be left with no choice. These busybody fucks will continue to escalate until our side is forced to respond in kind. The alternative is to roll over and let them kill us. You up for that outcome? We can argue over whether ae should be proactive in making first strkes, or simply bide our time and unleash the full monty only after they have.

Being reactionary and playing defense may look better from a PR standpoint on the international stage to pussies like the UN where everything is image over substance, but being the first to strike does impart certain advantages over having to regroup and defend oneself after the enemy gives you an ass kicking.

As far as genocide, this will be more a democide. I don’t care what race or sex these shits are. If they are part of the problem (i.e. a rabid leftist) then when Miller time finally kicks off, they are fair game. Factually, the biggest group who need to be BTFO are liberal white people, because they constitute the single largest contingent of leftist
assholes. Many minorities will need the bulldozer of demographic destiny generously applied as well, but our most pressing problem in actual numbers is libshit crackers, as they are the ones who built and perpetuate the system that is working against us.

They are the swamp creatures of the deep state. If they are eliminated, all their “pets” are bereft of leadership to steer them, as well as the machine that protects them by persecuting the good guys. Sure, in the absence of a cohesive narrative from the state, they will be randomly violent and cause all manner of shit and misery, but then that provides the further justification we need to bring them a mass culling to restore peace.

Irrespective of one’s personal thoughts and feelngs on how, or even if, violence on this level should be considered, the left will eventually lose patience with pussy footing around and go full retard. They are dangerously close to that point now, with their blithe dismissal of all valid complaints from the good guys. See turdeau, castro’s bastard versus The Truckers.

We keep getting louder and more forcefully agitating for the relief we want, and they keep acting like bigger cunts accusing us of all the mortal sinisms of modern politics to try and marginalize us, and then straight telling us to fuck off, that our concerns mean nothing and that we don’t matter at all. The point at which they will attempt to smash dissent with state sponsored violence (already being discussed by turdeau and associated jerkoffs regarding the convoy) cannot be far off.

Unless you are happy to capitulate to these pieces of shit and die on your knees, you will, ultimately, be forced into the fight. It is coming for you (and all of us) like it or not.

Regarding torture, as much as many of these people deserve slow, painful, horrific endings for what they’ve done, that will prove to be impractical just on time requried. A blade, bullet, bomb, or something else quick, inexpensive and highly effective will be much better to use for most. Creative torture can be selectively applied to some highly visible figure heads in public venues to help drive home the point we aren’t fuckng around anymore.

You are correct where target selection is required. The majority of the crap going on right now is because white apologizers and rabid leftists have convinced the POC to be their pawns. When, not if, CW2 commences these white controllers must be the ones that take the hardest hits. Cut off the head, and the body dies. At the same time, DM is correct; we will be faced by invasion of “peacekeepers” from around the world. China would LOVE to occupy this country just for the space it gives them for their population. And let’s not forget our resources.

A civil war will be very violent, but if when it comes the “democide” must be complete so that these problems don’t come back to haunt us in another twenty years.

Yes, many of us have good lives that will be sacrificed. And I look down at no man who wishes stay home. Telling you that you must fight beside me is the same crap that we’ll be fighting. We are ALL free men and women, and should NEVER be expected to follow along in something against our core beliefs. That is just the type of control that is leading us to a fight.

Dive Medic, please do a post expounding on what a s— fest a civil war would be. Your comments here were spot on.

Comments are closed.