I had to post it anyway; not just because it gave me a headache, but because these days people will just take what she's saying as fact.
Nothing new though. Feminism can't answer the NATURAL PROCESS OF MOTHERHOOD question for itself. As much as competes and wins social recognition; it meets its match when it comes to biology. There's no off switch to stop women from lactating or having children in general, and they often come against a litany of inconsistencies when they realize a lot of their rhetoric CANT WASH with what women are naturally inclined to WANT to do. Women want to fight "Patriarchy", but enjoy it when it benefits them, of course. BUT in this case: That fight fails in regards to women who want to -and are the only ones whom are biologically equipped in every regard- to have children. The fight against "the patriarchy" is -after all- a post modern one. Women having children underlines the fact that women ARE WOMEN in the end, which only furthers the deeper biological connection to what and how a NORMAL society is and functions. That certainly is no help in a post modern battle; almost as if you were about to enter a knife fight with no arms or legs.
I'm not impressed by Fox inviting on the most batshit leftists to make their hosts look good. Bobo would look like a balanced individual next to this twat.
You're getting your definition wrong. That was a term used to differentiate liberals that didn't like the movement to socialism in the 1800s. Liberals who still liked the free market.
Exactly. It's also wholly contradictory. Shapiro laid into kids at a high school when he spoke there about how dumb their poor parents are. If they were smarter, they'd have more money. Yet since the right-wing zealots NEVER seem to want to survey the implicit greed a free-market system creates, which leads to an outright destruction of competition: Most of those parents don't really have much of a choice, outside of working for those organizations who are doing the destruction. If they are (or were) willing participants in a free market, then the right should be defending them, not criticizing them.
The truth is: those parents (the ones who aren't getting a hand out), are a constant reminder of where the free market fails. People who lose their jobs to insider trading (which is really just "opportunity" that free market venerates, whether its ethical or legal or not), or who just lose their job to "downsizing" and wind up homeless are people who scare the right every single day. That maybe their system isn't perfect, and that as much as you can blame the individual: it won't be long till its imperfections hit YOU too.
I don't think that the two exist in a vaccum. The economy has a large impact on people's personal lives. Look at the 2008 economic collapse-- it had a horrible impact on people's personal lives. (suicide rates)
Liberal social programs are threatened by the GOP to help people that have been fucked over by deregulation or "free markets". The free market do virtually nothing to actually help the less fortunate so it's doesn't fit in with what I would call liberal.
Libertarians used to have this quote, "no gods no masters" but it seems like the American libertarian and the new classical liberals seem to sell out to corporate interest.
Yeah, which is why I've said repeatedly definitions change from 1800s to 2000s. That's the point Shapiro is making. Do I need to explain it a sixth time?
Ben Shapiro is also adamant that the Nazis were left wing. He is too narrow minded to think that he's isreal defending conservativism isn't related to some degree to the big bad Nazis.
Alright, alright, settle down. I will bite the bullet for you guys, let me impregnate that broad to make her understand about the natural process of breastfeeding.
Seriously, who the fuck watches this shit or gives enough of a fuck about some medical journal to cunt on about it?
Medical Journal: "Promoting breastfeeding as “natural” may be ethically problematic, and, even more troublingly, it may bolster this belief that “natural” approaches are presumptively healthier..." Referencing the “natural” in breastfeeding promotion, then, may inadvertently endorse a controversial set of values about family life and gender roles, which would be ethically inappropriate. Invoking the “natural” is also imprecise because it lacks a clear definition."
Clearly stated: If you say breastfeeding is natural than that implies only breastfeeding is healthier and only a mother can raise a child, both of which aren't true,
Tucker Carlson: LIBTARD ATTACK ON GENDER ROLES, GENDER POLITICS!!! Let's interview some bitch from Catalina Magazine founded in 2001 by a Latina journalist to break the stereotypes of Hispanics in the US media and entertainment.
Latina cunt: I know plenty of people who use lactation consultants and formula because they can't breastfeed. However, I'm too retarded to say the word "wet nurse," and Tucker's entire GOT EM point collapses.
I read what talking heads take out of context in order to stir up fake controversy and phony outrage so I can attack someone for what they say rather than how they say it.
I will admit that Tucker is really good at asking his guests leading questions so he can get the retarded answer he will later skewer them on.
But ultimately, if you get the majority of your news from cable television, you should be chemically castrated.
Still doesn't solve the problem feminists have with child nurturing.
Also: The regressive left are full of people who will vehemently pursue the idea of "Natural" in their own lives, as it (and it does) create a better standard of living. The crux of a lot of their arguments in regards to society and the environment function around the idea of "natural". So now they just get to abandon it when it DOESNT fit their political views?
Look at the biology deniers in our own society: These are people who just have a general malaise of society as a whole and their own reality. Going toward a "wet nurse" as a viable solution only underlines that a basic woman's function FROM BIRTH is to co-concieve and carry children, because you're going from woman to woman. Thats what they're primarily wired to do. THEY DON'T HAVE TO EVER HAVE CHILDREN AND NO ONE IS SAYING THEY SHOULD, but thats what they're biologically meant to do. Which is the biggest issue feminists have. They're trying to escape their own reality for reasons other than equality, whether or not its "natural"
So you ignored my point to rant about e-rebels, but if you read the scholarly article, it actually props up the biological parental roles in the context of the modern nuclear family.
I don't spend the majority of my day internalizing the talking points of those I allegedly dislike, so I was hoping you could enlighten me further on the strawman opinions of your political enemies.
She's trying to make an argument that there is something biological in men that would drive them to be nurturers. IF you have a fucking heart in your chest, you would just do that anyway for your kid (or if you come on this sub you'd punt it like a oblong rugby ball). You don't need to be biologically wired to do so. However, women have the wiring. They're destined for it. THEY DONT HAVE TO HAVE KIDS, BUT THEY ARE DESIGNED TO HAVE KIDS. Yet saying that undermines feminism and feminist points, so you get dopes like her.
It's what I was saying before in this thread: Feminism can't compete with facts and biology. They want what they're saying to be so definitive, but they're defeated EACH TIME by the general facts of the universe.
Agreed I'm very down the middle, and understand both are fucky. I was against the Christian Right censoring everything in the early 2000's and I'm against to SJW censoring the same shit now. I love me some tucker though. Even the people he may have on that I agree with, they are already limping dogs and he just destroys them. Sam is 100% right about his show
She's trying to make an argument that there is something biological in men that would drive them to be nurturers. IF you have a fucking heart in your chest, you would just do that anyway for your kid (or if you come on this sub you'd punt it like a oblong rugby ball). You don't need to be biologically wired to do so. However, women have the wiring. They're destined for it. THEY DONT HAVE TO HAVE KIDS, BUT THEY ARE DESIGNED TO HAVE KIDS. Yet saying that undermines feminism and feminist points, so you get dopes like her.
69 comments
n/a schmuckOnWheels 2017-06-20
Tucker Carlson is killing it.
n/a goo-gobbler 2017-06-20
Yes, but it's easy to look great when you debate a lunatic cunt.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
I had to post it anyway; not just because it gave me a headache, but because these days people will just take what she's saying as fact.
Nothing new though. Feminism can't answer the NATURAL PROCESS OF MOTHERHOOD question for itself. As much as competes and wins social recognition; it meets its match when it comes to biology. There's no off switch to stop women from lactating or having children in general, and they often come against a litany of inconsistencies when they realize a lot of their rhetoric CANT WASH with what women are naturally inclined to WANT to do. Women want to fight "Patriarchy", but enjoy it when it benefits them, of course. BUT in this case: That fight fails in regards to women who want to -and are the only ones whom are biologically equipped in every regard- to have children. The fight against "the patriarchy" is -after all- a post modern one. Women having children underlines the fact that women ARE WOMEN in the end, which only furthers the deeper biological connection to what and how a NORMAL society is and functions. That certainly is no help in a post modern battle; almost as if you were about to enter a knife fight with no arms or legs.
n/a Doc_McCoy79 2017-06-20
TL; DR Opie has breasts
n/a SWIMsfriend 2017-06-20
I'd rather have someone show people how delusional these cunts are than for comedy central to give a tv show to these same faagots
n/a DonaldObama81 2017-06-20
I'm not impressed by Fox inviting on the most batshit leftists to make their hosts look good. Bobo would look like a balanced individual next to this twat.
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
All shows do this if they have the other side on. Tucker does the Tucker Face, Anderson Cooper does the eye roll.
n/a weed_n_titties66 2017-06-20
Tucker Carlson should be a jail. He murders faggots every night on T.V
n/a LarryKleist711 2017-06-20
Tucker Carlson should be
in a jailawarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He murders faggot on TV every night.n/a Notmyfirstacc3 2017-06-20
I hope you're awarded a bullet so we can all have freedom.
n/a LarryKleist711 2017-06-20
Clever.
n/a doch15 2017-06-20
TAKE DA HIT
n/a A_Friendly_Creeper 2017-06-20
oofa
n/a LoouisCuCK 2017-06-20
r/jesuschristreddit
n/a RabboRibbo 2017-06-20
Breastfeeding, like most things involving women, is disgusting.
n/a doch15 2017-06-20
Eeeeew girls are icky - rabboribbo
n/a RabboRibbo 2017-06-20
Her neck does a convincing Michael Phelps impression.
n/a outthatdump69 2017-06-20
I'm sorry, no matter how right he is, I still can't I see the bow-tie wearing faggot from MSNBC.
n/a TriangleDimes 2017-06-20
you know what they say, you live in the past and then the past starts living in you.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
It's like when Ben Shapiro says he's a "classical liberal": No you're not, faggot. Among other things: You hate the poor too much to be liberal.
n/a SWIMsfriend 2017-06-20
You're poor, why would anyone not hate you faggot
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
You're getting your definition wrong. That was a term used to differentiate liberals that didn't like the movement to socialism in the 1800s. Liberals who still liked the free market.
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
So a libertarian? That's still not liberal.
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
Definitions change over centuries.
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
"Classical liberal" these days seems to mean American Libertarian. Being free market and socially liberal seems like a contradiction lol.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
Exactly. It's also wholly contradictory. Shapiro laid into kids at a high school when he spoke there about how dumb their poor parents are. If they were smarter, they'd have more money. Yet since the right-wing zealots NEVER seem to want to survey the implicit greed a free-market system creates, which leads to an outright destruction of competition: Most of those parents don't really have much of a choice, outside of working for those organizations who are doing the destruction. If they are (or were) willing participants in a free market, then the right should be defending them, not criticizing them.
The truth is: those parents (the ones who aren't getting a hand out), are a constant reminder of where the free market fails. People who lose their jobs to insider trading (which is really just "opportunity" that free market venerates, whether its ethical or legal or not), or who just lose their job to "downsizing" and wind up homeless are people who scare the right every single day. That maybe their system isn't perfect, and that as much as you can blame the individual: it won't be long till its imperfections hit YOU too.
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
Yeah. That's all true.
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
Why? What does not caring what people do in their personal lives have to do with the economy?
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
I don't think that the two exist in a vaccum. The economy has a large impact on people's personal lives. Look at the 2008 economic collapse-- it had a horrible impact on people's personal lives. (suicide rates)
Liberal social programs are threatened by the GOP to help people that have been fucked over by deregulation or "free markets". The free market do virtually nothing to actually help the less fortunate so it's doesn't fit in with what I would call liberal.
Libertarians used to have this quote, "no gods no masters" but it seems like the American libertarian and the new classical liberals seem to sell out to corporate interest.
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
https://mobile.twitter.com/thejd800/status/877298519731707905
Classical liberals are right wing/libertarians.
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
Yeah, which is why I've said repeatedly definitions change from 1800s to 2000s. That's the point Shapiro is making. Do I need to explain it a sixth time?
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
I got it buddy.
n/a Pug_123 2017-06-20
Ben Shapiro is also adamant that the Nazis were left wing. He is too narrow minded to think that he's isreal defending conservativism isn't related to some degree to the big bad Nazis.
n/a SirWallaceII 2017-06-20
I like the bowtie.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
he doesn't really wear those anymore
n/a SWIMsfriend 2017-06-20
You hate bow-ties but you probably wear heavy metal t-shirts and the same jeans you wore back in high school
n/a outthatdump69 2017-06-20
Yea, and those things are still significantly less gay than a man in his 40's wearing a bow-tie...
n/a AmberBeard 2017-06-20
I think you need to start a sub for these.
n/a passovercoke 2017-06-20
Alright, alright, settle down. I will bite the bullet for you guys, let me impregnate that broad to make her understand about the natural process of breastfeeding.
n/a SirWallaceII 2017-06-20
Of course. (((they))) dont like the mother gig, (((they))) have more fun drinking lattes and spending money.
(((feminism))) will destroy the west.
n/a LarryKleist711 2017-06-20
You forgot drinking wine, popping xanbars/Vicodins, and fucking the tennis pro and or personal trainer.
n/a SirWallaceII 2017-06-20
good point!
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
Sounds like my dream life. :(
n/a heyitsbobby 2017-06-20
Also fucking a tranny and financially supporting your older brother.
n/a HugininuM 2017-06-20
Feminism's days are numbered, whether through muslims or the growing resurgence in traditionalism. It has no future.
n/a SirWallaceII 2017-06-20
good point
n/a slyburgaler 2017-06-20
There is no traditional resurgence
n/a LarryKleist711 2017-06-20
To be fair. Opie breastfed Bam Margera's kid with Lynsi.
n/a youarenottheguy68 2017-06-20
What do opie and anthony have to do with this sub anymore? Dont post off topic.
n/a RamonFrunkis 2017-06-20
Seriously, who the fuck watches this shit or gives enough of a fuck about some medical journal to cunt on about it?
Medical Journal: "Promoting breastfeeding as “natural” may be ethically problematic, and, even more troublingly, it may bolster this belief that “natural” approaches are presumptively healthier..." Referencing the “natural” in breastfeeding promotion, then, may inadvertently endorse a controversial set of values about family life and gender roles, which would be ethically inappropriate. Invoking the “natural” is also imprecise because it lacks a clear definition."
Clearly stated: If you say breastfeeding is natural than that implies only breastfeeding is healthier and only a mother can raise a child, both of which aren't true,
Tucker Carlson: LIBTARD ATTACK ON GENDER ROLES, GENDER POLITICS!!! Let's interview some bitch from Catalina Magazine founded in 2001 by a Latina journalist to break the stereotypes of Hispanics in the US media and entertainment.
Latina cunt: I know plenty of people who use lactation consultants and formula because they can't breastfeed. However, I'm too retarded to say the word "wet nurse," and Tucker's entire GOT EM point collapses.
Altrightards: FUCKING BURIED THOSE SJW CUNTS!!!!
n/a SWIMsfriend 2017-06-20
Don't you have a cock to suck right now? You better get started, o bet you have tickets to see colbert's show
n/a RamonFrunkis 2017-06-20
I read what talking heads take out of context in order to stir up fake controversy and phony outrage so I can attack someone for what they say rather than how they say it.
I will admit that Tucker is really good at asking his guests leading questions so he can get the retarded answer he will later skewer them on.
But ultimately, if you get the majority of your news from cable television, you should be chemically castrated.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
Still doesn't solve the problem feminists have with child nurturing.
Also: The regressive left are full of people who will vehemently pursue the idea of "Natural" in their own lives, as it (and it does) create a better standard of living. The crux of a lot of their arguments in regards to society and the environment function around the idea of "natural". So now they just get to abandon it when it DOESNT fit their political views?
Look at the biology deniers in our own society: These are people who just have a general malaise of society as a whole and their own reality. Going toward a "wet nurse" as a viable solution only underlines that a basic woman's function FROM BIRTH is to co-concieve and carry children, because you're going from woman to woman. Thats what they're primarily wired to do. THEY DON'T HAVE TO EVER HAVE CHILDREN AND NO ONE IS SAYING THEY SHOULD, but thats what they're biologically meant to do. Which is the biggest issue feminists have. They're trying to escape their own reality for reasons other than equality, whether or not its "natural"
n/a RamonFrunkis 2017-06-20
Fucking buried them, Dwight!
So you ignored my point to rant about e-rebels, but if you read the scholarly article, it actually props up the biological parental roles in the context of the modern nuclear family.
I don't spend the majority of my day internalizing the talking points of those I allegedly dislike, so I was hoping you could enlighten me further on the strawman opinions of your political enemies.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
You're not doing well here sir. Or you're purposely being contrarian.
n/a McGowan9 2017-06-20
Her eyes scream "I'm fucking mental."
n/a insertclevereference 2017-06-20
Or, "There's a cactus in my twat!"
n/a Doc_McCoy79 2017-06-20
"There's a snake in my boot!"
n/a tranthonycumiashow 2017-06-20
"There's a peckah in my butt!"
n/a Toss__Pot 2017-06-20
her stupidity is AMAZING! how do these people remember to breathe?
n/a Mintyfresh03 2017-06-20
Im not sure who's the bigger faggot, the faggot Tucker Carlson or the woman faggot
n/a thissiteruinedme 2017-06-20
Every feminist argument boils down to women should get free shit or get out of responsibility.
n/a Clint0nBukowski 2017-06-20
So if my wife pumps the milk and I feed the baby her stored milk, that's ok or not? This woman is fucking nuts
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
She's trying to make an argument that there is something biological in men that would drive them to be nurturers. IF you have a fucking heart in your chest, you would just do that anyway for your kid (or if you come on this sub you'd punt it like a oblong rugby ball). You don't need to be biologically wired to do so. However, women have the wiring. They're destined for it. THEY DONT HAVE TO HAVE KIDS, BUT THEY ARE DESIGNED TO HAVE KIDS. Yet saying that undermines feminism and feminist points, so you get dopes like her.
n/a Clint0nBukowski 2017-06-20
I don't personally know a single person that was active In their child's up bringing that didn't feed their baby. Lol what the fuck
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
It's what I was saying before in this thread: Feminism can't compete with facts and biology. They want what they're saying to be so definitive, but they're defeated EACH TIME by the general facts of the universe.
To be fair: So are the Right
n/a Clint0nBukowski 2017-06-20
Agreed I'm very down the middle, and understand both are fucky. I was against the Christian Right censoring everything in the early 2000's and I'm against to SJW censoring the same shit now. I love me some tucker though. Even the people he may have on that I agree with, they are already limping dogs and he just destroys them. Sam is 100% right about his show
n/a humanmeat 2017-06-20
If anyone can prove men can breastfeed, it's the members of this sub.
Science has never seen such a high density of mantits
n/a doch15 2017-06-20
It takes a professional like tucker to not tell that cunt to stop being retarded.
n/a SpurdoBurdo 2017-06-20
As far as complete lunatics go, she was actually pretty cordial
n/a Idontcareaboutyoutit 2017-06-20
I hope everyone involved in this is killed
n/a bonniesretardsister 2017-06-20
Definitions change over centuries.
n/a TangerineReam 2017-06-20
She's trying to make an argument that there is something biological in men that would drive them to be nurturers. IF you have a fucking heart in your chest, you would just do that anyway for your kid (or if you come on this sub you'd punt it like a oblong rugby ball). You don't need to be biologically wired to do so. However, women have the wiring. They're destined for it. THEY DONT HAVE TO HAVE KIDS, BUT THEY ARE DESIGNED TO HAVE KIDS. Yet saying that undermines feminism and feminist points, so you get dopes like her.