Message from @stem
Discord ID: 669940182471933984
the answer to the women question is that the premises of feminism were equalitarian ideology which is not based on science - that it sought to undo naturally emergent systems which had prevailed for thousands of years with utterly disasterous consequences
I think I was getting somewhere.
: (
Yes
also the question is nonsense because it talks about rights
the premise can just be individualism
Yes
Rights oy vey
"take each person as an individual"
What if rights don't exist
>implying they exist
And if they do exist
why should they be equal
feminism is actually more rooted in Marxism than individualist liberalism
now, of course, shitlibs get confused and can't help be mix up equal opportunity with equality of outcome
because none of these principles is actually right or wrong
I honestly root feminism as a dysfunctional personality type. Ugh
both principles are useless
Why have equality of opportunity or outcome
yes, witches originated it
They are impossible to achieve
Hey, I can get away with making fun of feminism in front of feminist.
witches and simps
Rights? More like.. state granted privileges
You cant get equality of opportunity, what does that even mean
<:supermale:399903458964275203>
I didn't mean to scare Big Ben off.
: (
burning witches was a good social practice which we can cogently defend
Even if you gave 2 different individuals the exact same resources
@The Living Paradox English philosophers are more or less an oxymoron, the language just is crap for it (or brits have all braindamage)
Their opportunities arent gonna be the same
(Cuz they arent the same)
witch burning was the medieval THOT patrol
Thing is once you accept Equality of Opportunity
The Jew only has to push a little bit for you to enter the Outcome mode
if you think that people aren't equal, then you're a bad person
I mean, ain't it obvious, why they use all that empirial measurement shit?