Progressives approve bigotry against targets they consider appropriate.

Man of Ethics

Gold Member
Feb 28, 2021
4,682
2,134
248
As I have said before, Progressives are the greatest evil since WWII. Bigotry against any birth group is evil.

An example is Here.

As a tidal wave of male-hating shows depicts women as victims, BEL MOONEY fears this toxic sex war hurts us all

But then it became clear on social media that you had to agree Men Are The Enemy — or face anger yourself. You couldn’t suggest ‘not all men are like that’ — which is a statement so obviously true as to be inarguable. The hashtag ‘Not All Men’ became as totally unacceptable.

You had to parrot the received opinion or face incoherent anger and end up being abused yourself.

Still obviously badly in need of ‘education’, I pointed out that there are plenty of men (such as my husband, son and son-in-law, to cite but three) who are good, kind and gentle, and thoroughly loathe sexism in all forms. But this was not allowed. No nuance here, thanks. The furious feminist lobby believes that stating ‘Not all men’ is a betrayal. But why should that be?

Are all our lovely partners somehow ‘responsible’ for domestic violence, rape and murder? According to the prejudice, because they were born male they are de facto guilty.

Not all Progressives but enough Progressives support this bigotry.

Fortunately China and Russia crack down on Progressive bigotry. In USA Progressive bigotry is has been tolerated too long. Now any opposition to this bigotry brings repercussions.
 
Only CrusaderFrank would love this comment. He's a member of the Confused Religion, aka Trumpism. But I digress.

You wrote about Domestic Violence, I ran my agency's DV Unit and interacted with the victims (mostly women, rarely men in gay relationships) and defendants as well as members of private sector.

When I encountered members of shelters and other counseling agencies and my contact with their members, I experienced some distance between the women and me, before they accepted me.

Many of them had been violated by men and feared them. Fight was not a choice, flight was there only option. It had nothing to do with being Democrats, Progressives or Ethics.
 
1) You wrote about Domestic Violence, I ran my agency's DV Unit and interacted with the victims (mostly women, rarely men in gay relationships) and defendants as well as members of private sector.

2) When I encountered members of shelters and other counseling agencies and my contact with their members, I experienced some distance between the women and me, before they accepted me.

Many of them had been violated by men and feared them. Fight was not a choice, flight was there only option. It had nothing to do with being Democrats, Progressives or Ethics.
1) Many men are also victims of Domestic Violence. According to this study, about 70% of non-reciprocal Intimate Partner Violence is against men. Many men were abused as children by their mothers. No man would be excused for disliking women.

2) Of course any woman hurt by men is likely to dislike or distrust men. This distrust grows into full hatred only due to Progressive Worldview which views men as a class of oppressors.
 
1) Many men are also victims of Domestic Violence. According to this study, about 70% of non-reciprocal Intimate Partner Violence is against men. Many men were abused as children by their mothers. No man would be excused for disliking women.

2) Of course any woman hurt by men is likely to dislike or distrust men. This distrust grows into full hatred only due to Progressive Worldview which views men as a class of oppressors.
This has nothing to do with ethics. One study, one date point, is not a theory, it's a hypothesis at best. Violence is the absence of a moral compass; the example is clear - in my opinion - as those in the military service who suffer from PTSD as well as serial killers and rogue cops (btw, I'm a retired law enforcement officer) who don't suffer from PTSD.
 

Forum List

Back
Top