Democrats' white male problem

[MisterBeale]

Is this a serious question?
.

Yeah, it's a serious question. What is "this"? What is it you perceive is going on with white males? Do you perceive they are being somehow oppressed? Your "payback" comment indicates you do.

I find it very difficult to believe you don't know what I'm talking about, so I won't burn a lot of bandwidth here.

To answer your question: "This" would the various current cultural/sociological behaviors manifesting from the term "male privilege".

Your agreement is not required, nor is your stated recognition of that term.
.

You didn't answer the question. Recognizing that male or white privilege exists does not equal male oppression. Your payback comment indicates you perceive that white men ARE being oppressed as some sort of retaliation for the past oppression of minorities and women. Men, especially white men aren't being oppressed.

I agree with you, they aren't being oppressed.

But you have this terribly misguided notion that white men somehow have "privilege." If anyone has privilege in modern corporate and elite society, it is minorities and women. This is obvious to any rational observer.

The elite society desires diversity, and men need women, not the other way around. YOU are so deluded.

Feminism’s Dependency Trap
Feminism's Dependency Trap - Quillette

". . . This is not to deny that there is real and brutal violence against women, best handled by the police and the criminal justice system. But if a co-worker lets a woman know she looks hot in her skirt this can reasonably be dealt with by a woman on her own, rather than by corporate structures of authority. If we would prefer not to deal with these things on our own, fair enough, but let us not re-describe this reliance on authority as a victory for feminism, or for women’s empowerment, and instead call it what it is: an instance of women’s dependence on structural power; a paternal bureaucracy that has arrogated ever more coercive power under the banner of gender equity.


Feminism is suffering from a lack of respect for women themselves. This is part of the lack of respect for other individuals as individuals that characterizes modern culture. We have exchanged personal agency for the depersonalization of human life and individual accountability for a bureaucratic structure that is ultimately responsible to no one, because no one takes personal responsibility for it. If we want to retreat from encountering others in their particular individuality, however distasteful, we should not do violence to logic by calling it a triumph of personal agency. A complaint to human resources may make us feel safe and avoid a potentially uncomfortable confrontation, but at the expense of personal courage.. . ."

"If anyone has privilege in modern corporate and elite society, it is minorities and women..." I guess that's why such a HUGE % of our corporate leaders and elite society leaders are minorities and women, right?

Women choose to have families, minorities, are by definition, minorities.

 

[FA_Q2]

First, a white male today is not responsible for what happened in our history. Second, two wrongs don't make a right.

So if this is about payback, I don't think it's an unreasonable concern.
.

White men aren't actually being treated the way women and minorities have been...so, strawman.

I didn't say they were. So, strawman.
.

You just said "if this is payback". What "this"?

Is this a serious question?
.

Yeah, it's a serious question. What is "this"? What is it you perceive is going on with white males? Do you perceive they are being somehow oppressed? Your "payback" comment indicates you do.

Your inability to see anything other than oppressor/oppressed IS the problem - not some silly demand that white men must be oppressed in order for the OP's point to be valid.

The FACT is that the democrat party has went all in on making white people and particularly white men the modern patsy for virtually everything that is wrong with the world. It is a moronic position to take when 70% of the nation white.

White men need no oppression to be turned off by a political position that essentially claims they are the problem regardless of what they have done or what they have faced.

You want to understand how Trump can attain office? This is exactly how. When many are faced with the option to vote for the candidate that sees them as oppressors when they have in no way shape or form oppressed anyone at all, they will continue to vote for whatever crap the other side throws their way.

 

[Correll]

Yeah, it's a serious question. What is "this"? What is it you perceive is going on with white males? Do you perceive they are being somehow oppressed? Your "payback" comment indicates you do.

I find it very difficult to believe you don't know what I'm talking about, so I won't burn a lot of bandwidth here.

To answer your question: "This" would the various current cultural/sociological behaviors manifesting from the term "male privilege".

Your agreement is not required, nor is your stated recognition of that term.
.

You didn't answer the question. Recognizing that male or white privilege exists does not equal male oppression. Your payback comment indicates you perceive that white men ARE being oppressed as some sort of retaliation for the past oppression of minorities and women. Men, especially white men aren't being oppressed.

I know it's just one datapoint, but it makes an argument:

It took my Nephew one year to get a job in Computer Science Field. He applied to a multitude of places and is very sharp. Someone you would want to hire. He and his girlfriend graduated with Computer Science degrees from Cal-Poly. She submitted three applications, interviewed three times and was offered two jobs for her effort. It took her < 30 days from Graduating. My Nephew submitted more than 40 applications, interviewed 5 times and was offered one job. It took him a year to get a job. I asked him why it took so long in consideration of his degree and where it was from and he replied "I'm a white male" He is a liberal.

Go figure.

It is always a convenient crutch as to why one doesn't get hired, isn't it? Are you asserting that his girlfriend got a job she wasn't deserving of?

No. I guess you are unaware that there is a problem with not having enough females employed by tech companies. Given two candidates whom are equally qualified, the minority or woman gets the nod. It's what I was taught through our HR management classes where I worked. Equal opportunity = a need to balance the employee profiles to match the averages of the country.

Discriminating in favor of women, at the expense of the male candidates, is not equal.


BUT, that fact that they taught you it was, is strong evidence of the anti-white male discrimination the OP and I have been talking about.


THanks for the first person observation of the problem.

 

[Correll]

Why? We both know about them. I've posted them here before. YOu've read them.


Let's skip forward to the point where you don't care that it is true, and you just insult me and deflect from the facts.

You've posted nothing....and now you are using the well-worn excuse because your bluff has been called. But, carry on in your perceived victimhood.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

Nope, you didn't provide squat. But I've gotten used to CRCs pulling this excuse. Shame on me (and anyone else) if we continued to fall for that lie.

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

 

[Seawytch]

You've posted nothing....and now you are using the well-worn excuse because your bluff has been called. But, carry on in your perceived victimhood.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

Nope, you didn't provide squat. But I've gotten used to CRCs pulling this excuse. Shame on me (and anyone else) if we continued to fall for that lie.

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

 

[Correll]

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

Nope, you didn't provide squat. But I've gotten used to CRCs pulling this excuse. Shame on me (and anyone else) if we continued to fall for that lie.

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Your silly denial, makes you look silly.


Now, does anyone want to discuss this issue seriously? Or do we just take as a given the dems racist hostility to white males and there is nothing more to be said about it?

 

[Seawytch]

Nope, you didn't provide squat. But I've gotten used to CRCs pulling this excuse. Shame on me (and anyone else) if we continued to fall for that lie.

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Your silly denial, makes you look silly.


Now, does anyone want to discuss this issue seriously? Or do we just take as a given the dems racist hostility to white males and there is nothing more to be said about it?

Except my "denial" came with actual facts and studies, not random "my son didn't get the school they wanted" stories.

You really need to learn what racism is. You don't have a clue.

 

[Correll]

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Your silly denial, makes you look silly.


Now, does anyone want to discuss this issue seriously? Or do we just take as a given the dems racist hostility to white males and there is nothing more to be said about it?

Except my "denial" came with actual facts and studies, not random "my son didn't get the school they wanted" stories.

You really need to learn what racism is. You don't have a clue.

Irrelevant facts presented which did not address the issue, presented just to distract from a Truth we all know.


The studies and documentation on anti-white discrimination have all been posted here many times.


YOu guys demand them, then dismiss them, with varying degrees of stupidity, and devolve into increasingly stupid and trollish logical fallacies.


We have all seen this many times. I don't see a reason to do it again.


What comes next? What do you have after that?

 

[Polishprince]

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

Nope, you didn't provide squat. But I've gotten used to CRCs pulling this excuse. Shame on me (and anyone else) if we continued to fall for that lie.

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Against, White, Normative Males, there certainly is a huge amount of discrimination and phobia against us.

We are condemned as deplorables, our culture and customs are condemned.

The problem is that so many so-called Straight White Male leaders are traitors to their class.

When will the schools have Straight White Male month, where kids are taught our tremendous history, and the people like Einstein, Edison and Christ and their great accomplishments in the field of excellence.

 

[Seawytch]

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Your silly denial, makes you look silly.


Now, does anyone want to discuss this issue seriously? Or do we just take as a given the dems racist hostility to white males and there is nothing more to be said about it?

Except my "denial" came with actual facts and studies, not random "my son didn't get the school they wanted" stories.

You really need to learn what racism is. You don't have a clue.

Irrelevant facts presented which did not address the issue, presented just to distract from a Truth we all know.


The studies and documentation on anti-white discrimination have all been posted here many times.


YOu guys demand them, then dismiss them, with varying degrees of stupidity, and devolve into increasingly stupid and trollish logical fallacies.


We have all seen this many times. I don't see a reason to do it again.


What comes next? What do you have after that?

Well I haven't seen you post them so do it again. You keep saying you have all these studies you don't produce. It's kind of like Trump claiming he's a billionaire without releasing his taxes.

You haven't produced them because there is no discrimination against white males, period.

The Discrimination In College Admissions Nobody Is Talking About

Amalia Halikias and Lanya Olmstead share something in common. They are both Ivy League graduates. They are both half Asian. And they both opted to identify as the other half of their ethnicity when applying to college--white.
​

 

[bodecea]

Yeah, it's a serious question. What is "this"? What is it you perceive is going on with white males? Do you perceive they are being somehow oppressed? Your "payback" comment indicates you do.

I find it very difficult to believe you don't know what I'm talking about, so I won't burn a lot of bandwidth here.

To answer your question: "This" would the various current cultural/sociological behaviors manifesting from the term "male privilege".

Your agreement is not required, nor is your stated recognition of that term.
.

You didn't answer the question. Recognizing that male or white privilege exists does not equal male oppression. Your payback comment indicates you perceive that white men ARE being oppressed as some sort of retaliation for the past oppression of minorities and women. Men, especially white men aren't being oppressed.

I know it's just one datapoint, but it makes an argument:

It took my Nephew one year to get a job in Computer Science Field. He applied to a multitude of places and is very sharp. Someone you would want to hire. He and his girlfriend graduated with Computer Science degrees from Cal-Poly. She submitted three applications, interviewed three times and was offered two jobs for her effort. It took her < 30 days from Graduating. My Nephew submitted more than 40 applications, interviewed 5 times and was offered one job. It took him a year to get a job. I asked him why it took so long in consideration of his degree and where it was from and he replied "I'm a white male" He is a liberal.

Go figure.

It is always a convenient crutch as to why one doesn't get hired, isn't it? Are you asserting that his girlfriend got a job she wasn't deserving of?

No. I guess you are unaware that there is a problem with not having enough females employed by tech companies. Given two candidates whom are equally qualified, the minority or woman gets the nod. It's what I was taught through our HR management classes where I worked. Equal opportunity = a need to balance the employee profiles to match the averages of the country.

Nice anecdote, can you back what you just said with evidence?

 

[bodecea]

Yeah, it's a serious question. What is "this"? What is it you perceive is going on with white males? Do you perceive they are being somehow oppressed? Your "payback" comment indicates you do.

I find it very difficult to believe you don't know what I'm talking about, so I won't burn a lot of bandwidth here.

To answer your question: "This" would the various current cultural/sociological behaviors manifesting from the term "male privilege".

Your agreement is not required, nor is your stated recognition of that term.
.

You didn't answer the question. Recognizing that male or white privilege exists does not equal male oppression. Your payback comment indicates you perceive that white men ARE being oppressed as some sort of retaliation for the past oppression of minorities and women. Men, especially white men aren't being oppressed.

I agree with you, they aren't being oppressed.

But you have this terribly misguided notion that white men somehow have "privilege." If anyone has privilege in modern corporate and elite society, it is minorities and women. This is obvious to any rational observer.

The elite society desires diversity, and men need women, not the other way around. YOU are so deluded.

Feminism’s Dependency Trap
Feminism's Dependency Trap - Quillette

". . . This is not to deny that there is real and brutal violence against women, best handled by the police and the criminal justice system. But if a co-worker lets a woman know she looks hot in her skirt this can reasonably be dealt with by a woman on her own, rather than by corporate structures of authority. If we would prefer not to deal with these things on our own, fair enough, but let us not re-describe this reliance on authority as a victory for feminism, or for women’s empowerment, and instead call it what it is: an instance of women’s dependence on structural power; a paternal bureaucracy that has arrogated ever more coercive power under the banner of gender equity.


Feminism is suffering from a lack of respect for women themselves. This is part of the lack of respect for other individuals as individuals that characterizes modern culture. We have exchanged personal agency for the depersonalization of human life and individual accountability for a bureaucratic structure that is ultimately responsible to no one, because no one takes personal responsibility for it. If we want to retreat from encountering others in their particular individuality, however distasteful, we should not do violence to logic by calling it a triumph of personal agency. A complaint to human resources may make us feel safe and avoid a potentially uncomfortable confrontation, but at the expense of personal courage.. . ."

"If anyone has privilege in modern corporate and elite society, it is minorities and women..." I guess that's why such a HUGE % of our corporate leaders and elite society leaders are minorities and women, right?

Women choose to have families, minorities, are by definition, minorities.

Men don't choose to have families?

 

[bodecea]

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

Nope, you didn't provide squat. But I've gotten used to CRCs pulling this excuse. Shame on me (and anyone else) if we continued to fall for that lie.

Don't know or care about your abbreviations.

Your demand for data that you are completely aware of, and have been shown before, was answered.


YOu saying "victimhood" is just you being a troll.

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

He says there is....and gets huffy if we ask for evidence to back up his claim. Therefore we are oppressing him.

 

[bodecea]

You claiming discrimination where none exists IS victimhood. There is discrimination in college admissions. It's just not white guys getting discriminated against.

Subtle Racial and Political Discrimination in College Admissions : Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Your silly denial, makes you look silly.


Now, does anyone want to discuss this issue seriously? Or do we just take as a given the dems racist hostility to white males and there is nothing more to be said about it?

Except my "denial" came with actual facts and studies, not random "my son didn't get the school they wanted" stories.

You really need to learn what racism is. You don't have a clue.

Irrelevant facts presented which did not address the issue, presented just to distract from a Truth we all know.


The studies and documentation on anti-white discrimination have all been posted here many times.


YOu guys demand them, then dismiss them, with varying degrees of stupidity, and devolve into increasingly stupid and trollish logical fallacies.


We have all seen this many times. I don't see a reason to do it again.


What comes next? What do you have after that?

Where are those "studies and documentation on anti-white discrimination"? You have never posted them here at all....claiming you have is just a lie.

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

White men aren't actually being treated the way women and minorities have been...so, strawman.

I didn't say they were. So, strawman.
.

You just said "if this is payback". What "this"?

Is this a serious question?
.

Yeah, it's a serious question. What is "this"? What is it you perceive is going on with white males? Do you perceive they are being somehow oppressed? Your "payback" comment indicates you do.

Your inability to see anything other than oppressor/oppressed IS the problem - not some silly demand that white men must be oppressed in order for the OP's point to be valid.

The FACT is that the democrat party has went all in on making white people and particularly white men the modern patsy for virtually everything that is wrong with the world. It is a moronic position to take when 70% of the nation white.

White men need no oppression to be turned off by a political position that essentially claims they are the problem regardless of what they have done or what they have faced.

You want to understand how Trump can attain office? This is exactly how. When many are faced with the option to vote for the candidate that sees them as oppressors when they have in no way shape or form oppressed anyone at all, they will continue to vote for whatever crap the other side throws their way.

One can only see that these school shooters are all young white men reflecting the nonsense that has been going on in schools for years.
- The total alienation of these young white men because they are white
- Double edged alienation that they are boys, and yet toxic because of it
- Dumbing down boys physically and domesticating them before graduation.

Most public school teachers, especially grade schools are females. Usually they have a very far leftist with gender and are messing these males beyond recognition. It is so dangerous and it is showing.

 

[Correll]

Discussing discrimination, where vast amounts of discrimination exists is NOT "victimhood", and you saying it is, is just you defending racism.

In post 117 we have a lib rookie explaining how in HR classes he was taught that, there is a need to balance the work force of tech companies to match the demographics of the country, and that the way to do it, is "if all other factors are equal" to always give the job to the woman, based on her gender, and to deny it to the guy, because he is a guy.


He did not say that that was his personal opinion, or something that a certain teacher felt. He said that he was taught that that is what "equal" means.


Always breaking for against the man, and lets face it, he meant white man, unless the white man has a undeniable edge, (lol!) is a form of DISCRIMINATION.


And he is so brainwashed, that he did not even know it, as he said it.

Except for the fact that there isn't "vast amounts" of discrimination against white males.

Your silly denial, makes you look silly.


Now, does anyone want to discuss this issue seriously? Or do we just take as a given the dems racist hostility to white males and there is nothing more to be said about it?

Except my "denial" came with actual facts and studies, not random "my son didn't get the school they wanted" stories.

You really need to learn what racism is. You don't have a clue.

Irrelevant facts presented which did not address the issue, presented just to distract from a Truth we all know.


The studies and documentation on anti-white discrimination have all been posted here many times.


YOu guys demand them, then dismiss them, with varying degrees of stupidity, and devolve into increasingly stupid and trollish logical fallacies.


We have all seen this many times. I don't see a reason to do it again.


What comes next? What do you have after that?

Well I haven't seen you post them so do it again. You keep saying you have all these studies you don't produce. It's kind of like Trump claiming he's a billionaire without releasing his taxes.

You haven't produced them because there is no discrimination against white males, period.

The Discrimination In College Admissions Nobody Is Talking About

Amalia Halikias and Lanya Olmstead share something in common. They are both Ivy League graduates. They are both half Asian. And they both opted to identify as the other half of their ethnicity when applying to college--white.
​

I'm well aware that asians face similar discrimination. We both know it. It would be silly of me to demand a link for something we both are familiar with.


I won't do that, because my goal here is to not play games and waste time.


So, let me ask you a simple question. Yes, or no.


Do you believe that poor blacks public schools, handicap blacks students, as a group, when they want to apply to colleges and universities?

 

[HenryBHough]

A Democrat problem easily solved.

Plenty of time between now and November, 2020 for gender-reassignment surgery to "fix" the issue for their ultimate candidate.

No real need, though, because Hillary is already (allegedly) female and she IS the candidate. It's just that you ordinary dim bulbs haven't been told yet by your masters.

 

[anynameyouwish]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

Decades ago, my father, a WW2 Vet worked as a pipefitter out of a labor union. Like most of his fellow pipefitters at the time, he was a pro labor, pro union Democrat.

White working class males were the backbone of the Democratic party for many years, but recently things have changed. In their headlong pursuit of diversity, the Democratic party have showcased women and minorities to the point of white males having been marginalized and even scorned by the Democrats as racist, sexist bigots, and often treated as 2nd class citizens. Not surprisingly, this has caused many working class white men to drift to the GOP where they feel more accepted. This stupid move by the left wing has been the reason democrats have lost elections.

Democrats - get it through your head. White males vote in large numbers, and if you don't start making them feel more valued in your "big tent" that tent won't be big enough, and you'll just keep losing.

This white male votes lib-prog-dem because he understands the dangers of right wing fascism.

I know of many others

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

THOUGHTS FROM AN INDEPENDENT

Decades ago, my father, a WW2 Vet worked as a pipefitter out of a labor union. Like most of his fellow pipefitters at the time, he was a pro labor, pro union Democrat.

White working class males were the backbone of the Democratic party for many years, but recently things have changed. In their headlong pursuit of diversity, the Democratic party have showcased women and minorities to the point of white males having been marginalized and even scorned by the Democrats as racist, sexist bigots. Not surprisingly, this has caused many working class white men to drift to the GOP where they feel more accepted. This stupid move by the left wing has been the reason democrats have lost elections, and if the left wing does not stop treating white males as 2nd class citizens, they are going to continue to lose.

Democrats - get it through your head. White males vote in large numbers, and if you don't start making them feel more valued in your "big tent" that tent won't be big enough, and you'll just keep losing.

The problem here is that the party is now largely under the control of the illiberal leftist authoritarians who are 100% committed to political correctness and identity politics.

So white men (and particularly straight white men) are welcome to come along for the ride, their votes are appreciated for sure, but at this point they are simply second class citizens who'd damn well better know their place and watch what they say.

That's just the reality at this point.
.

How does the back of the bus look like?

Yes, that is what those like Cortez want...

 

[Polishprince]

Do you believe that poor blacks public schools, handicap blacks students, as a group, when they want to apply to colleges and universities?

Going to crappy schools where there is no discipline hurts the students who graduate whether they are black or white.

B. Hussein O graduated from the snootiest prep school in the Pacific Rim. Even though he was a pissy student, getting loaded daily as the don of Honolulu's notorious Choom Gang, he still had an idea about academics because he went to a serious school. He wasn't a total embarrassment at all when he went to the Ivy League.

The same black guy, maybe with a better work ethic, who graduated at the top of his class at Notorious Big Memorial High School in Newark, where you had to know hand to hand combat to avoid getting shivved for your lunch money, wouldn't have done as well.

At NBHS, the key was survival, and most of the graduates seek to become trustees in the state penitentiary after they graduate. They didn't have actual academic studies, per se.