Hamas-ISIS crimes against women

[Dabidoe]

22 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

He is as ruthless if not more than Putin. He does not value human life more than Putin does.

He undermines democracy and rule of law for his personal power.

He is very corrupt and had trials for corruption ongoing.

He makes Israel weak, hated by the world and kills thousands of kids.

Terrible leader.

This false equation is not productive. Putin nor Netanyahu are "good guys" both are corrupt and run countries with militaristic populations and expansionist ambitions... but if you pay attention to the details it's clear that one is engaging in far more ruthless barbarism under far less valid circumstances than the other. Netanyahu is no Putin. Nor is he an angel.

I think it's sad that people who never gave a shit about the Middle East dogpiling on Israel because it's the new cause du'jour are the same ones who rattled the saber for Ukraine to march into a buzz saw. The Ukranain people (my ancestors) have been annhilated and have nothing to show for it, it was a battle that they never would have won and all our $ just led to more slaughter.

We have to be adults and stop moralizing and judging how countries do things. This "interventionista" thinking is pointless.

[Vrubel]

On 19/11/2023 at 10:31 PM, Karmadhi said:

He is as ruthless if not more than Putin. He does not value human life more than Putin does.

He undermines democracy and rule of law for his personal power.

He is very corrupt and had trials for corruption ongoing.

He makes Israel weak, hated by the world and kills thousands of kids.

Terrible leader.

More than Putin!? Please... Your bias makes your analyses very skewed.

Netanyahu is being investigated for things like accepting champagne bottles as gifts and giving money to a newspaper company. You cannot compare that to the level of corruption by Putin. He is not building lavish palaces or anything. 

Netanyahu undermines democracy by sneaky legislation and opportunistic coalition building not by killing or imprisoning the opposition. 

Also in war, he is not as ruthless as Putin. Putin is not held accountable by an indispensable stronger allied power. (Like the US with Israel). Putin doesn't even give a shit about his own soldiers. 

Shooting through human shields because you have had enough of sadistic terrorist atrocities is a very understandable ruthlessness, why should he play nice in this case. War is about achieving objectives by use of force. It's by definition ruthless and terrifying. If you were objective you would understand this.

Edited November 20, 2023 by Vrubel

[Dabidoe]

22 hours ago, Vrubel said:

Shooting through human shields because you have had enough of sadistic terrorist atrocities is a very understandable ruthlessness, why should he play nice in this case. War is about achieving objectives by use of force. It's by definition ruthless and terrifying. If you were objective you would understand this.

I agree. We are so quick to laser in on this detail as the end all justification when the truth is the United States has done far worse with a 1/1000th of the scrutiny.

While Saddam was no angel we went in and destroyed an organized society and replaced it with this idiotic notion that a bunch of warring tribes are going to just stick their thumb in blue ink and all problems will be solved. The atrocities the united states has quietly committed across the world have paled in comparison to the very scrutinized "war on terror" going on in Gaza. While I think they have failed to live up to the world's standards and should be scrutinized they have at least put in nominal effort to try and protect the civilians at least more than Hamas who are literally killing their own people.

[Danioover9000]

@zazen

On 18/11/2023 at 7:07 PM, zazen said:

A lot of the reasons for poor mental health are also due to urbanisation and the atomisation and sedentary lifestyle that brings. Urban centres are more pricey so financial stress and longer work hours to keep up is another. Additionally the sex and the city lifestyle that freedom brings. 
 

A article on Feminism:

“Feminism always oversteps its bounds and unravels the society in which it presents itself. It tilts towards seeking independence from men failing to see their interdependence with them. In the absence of men, women must become men to handle life’s harsher realities.

 

First generation feminism is a honeymoon phase, the best of both, because you see increased liberty, but haven’t undone the institutions of tradition you rally against but continue to benefit from.

 

In the 1st gen female workforce participation increases, but isn’t saturated. The average man can still take care of his family on a single wage. Men are still chivalrous. You’re less religious, but you haven’t forgone it entirely yet. You’re less chaste, but still possess shame.

 

You don’t come from broken families, and your birth rate isn’t depressed yet. So you have a present mother, father and many siblings. But it will be your generation that deprives your kids of the stability your parents gave you, because you will ignore their wisdom to be modern and free.

 

Things they endured and tolerated and stayed together through and didn’t divorce over, you will divorce over. The familial social ties that regulate and serve to preserve marriages will disintegrate, as everybody becomes less religious, more promiscuous, and more materialistic.

 

The west has shown the path of feminism not once, but twice.

 

First with Rome, and today, with the cultural state of Europe and the Anglosphere. It always leads to ruin. No sufficiently advanced society can elevate women at the expense of men without declining + destroying itself.

 

The path of your society will not be any different. You will not stop at the first wave. You will not learn from our mistakes. You will make the same mistakes and follow the same process. It's only in your foolish hubris you believe you're special and it'll be different for you.

 

I see feminism as women selling their granddaughters down the line. So that she may choose to work, her granddaughter will be forced to work. So that she may choose to study out of vanity, her granddaughter will be required to study to survive.

 

Today's women's choices are tomorrow's women's obligations.

 

I always cringe when they talk about "the women that paved the way" as if they built something rather than dismantled something.

 

They tell you they gave you freedoms, but the real freedom was theirs, you have no choice.

 

Older women have sold younger women down the line, so they could have it all in their youths, then packaged it to younger women as freeing them from the oppressive yokes they lived under.

 

Even though women in their time were happier, less stressed and didn't work as much/at all.

 

Feminism doesn’t remove obligation from women, it simply changes the set of obligations to ones which are less equitable.

 

This isn’t to say I don’t understand female resentment towards poor male leadership and excessive tyranny. But feminism is a false panacea for such ailments. In truth, most issues of tyranny are issues of low development.

 

Less developed men tend to govern more with violence. They are less interested in your opinion or leveraging your feelings to get you to cooperate. They would simply command you, and scare you into compliance.

 

It’s this you resent. Some patriarchies are excessive, but the alternative is worse. Limiting women's freedom and sexuality is the price of civilization. No regulation = no civilization.

 

What we really need is a better answer to leas developed male tyranny than feminism, because feminism is too destructive. The answer to bad men or ‘patriarchy’ isn’t the absence of men but the presence of good men.”

 

   This is a good post, people here should read anf contemplate this.

[Danioover9000]

@Lila9

On 18/11/2023 at 8:43 PM, Lila9 said:

 

The thing is that patriarchy is based on society not being safe for women, of men not being safe for women, and in a society that isn't safe for women, women should be protected by men from other men. They must be dependent on men and be at their mercy to be saved from other men. Also, if something bad happens to a women by a man, it doesn't grantee that she will be saved and justice will be made and the agressor will pay the price. In patriarchal society, mostly women are those who pay the price of men hurting them, for example, if a man rapes a woman, she usually would be the one to blame.

But when society is safe for women, and men are safe for women, there is no need for this unhealthy dependence on men for survival which also limits the woman's personal and spiritual growth.

In fact, the fact that men as a collective relatively safe for women and women are given rights and the protection from the law, it's the ultimate protection, thus, patriarchal society in particular isn't required.

When a woman isn't dependent on a man for basic survival, she has the power to choose a man she wants and not the one she needs, the choice is made by a free will and not because of necessity, which opens the possibilty of higher and more authentic form of love. 

However, there is a need for compassionate yet strong form of masculinity in the society, healthy masculinity. Not compassionate but weak and not strong but lack in compassion. There is a need for a healthy balance between the masculine and the feminine, a society which honors both.

This is not to demonize patriarchy as it is a step in the human collective evolutionary development, a step we are stepping on altogether. But it's not and shouldn't be the ultimate goal.

 

   Patriarchy is based on men ruling, and men providing and protecting their tribes from other tribes, kingdoms from other kingdoms, civilisations from other civilisations, countries from other countries. Patriarchy also is deeply based on genetics and biology, that most males are hardwired for fighting and defending their own women from their own tribe from outsiew male tribes that want to sexually reproduce throgb them. The majority of rights for women, feminism and egalitarianism principles are enforced and protected by men, meaning that if all men decided to abolish feminism and egalitarianism, there's little women can do about it. Feminism and egalitarianism exists because some men defend and enforce those ideologies, just like how autocratic rulers defend their lands. Women depending on men is the average then, and even now, when it comes to survival and defense from other men.

   Women's personal and spiritual growth, again, only possible because men protect them from other men that would enslave them and force breed with them from another tribe.

   What are you talking about? Laws come from theocracy and patriarchy. Saying that patriarchy and theocracy isn't required is inaccurate because they are what made society today. If you get to say that, then feminism and matriarchy also isn't required for society. Wht is feminism required for the continuation of society and civilisation, when men from patriarchy are needed to defend women from other men? Can feminism enforce it's own ideology absent patriarchy and military?

   And hyper individualism, Neoliberalism, multiculturalism, feminism and egalitarianism have given women so much individualism in choosing male partners, in putting career first over marriage and family, that it has massively contributed to the birthrate declining within westernized secular countries in Japan, South Korea, and other western countries. Even China and Russia, secularist countries, that jave legalized abortions decades ago, have sufered the consequences of that decision. You say there should be  health balance with the feminine and masculine, that societies should honor both for human flourishing, yet how is this a good direction when there's too much individualism and feminism in women and birthrates are decluning currently? How is it good when secularism trans and LGBTQ ideologies when theg are reproductive dead ends that won't advance human flourishing? How is any of this current situation balanced?

   How is this a human evolution development when these ideologies are antithetical to human flourishing, declining birthrates and increasing divorce rates, and indoctrinating future generations to continue believing in feminism, egalitarianism and secularism?

[jaylimix]

On 11/22/2023 at 7:07 PM, Danioover9000 said:

 

   How is this a human evolution development when these ideologies are antithetical to human flourishing, declining birthrates and increasing divorce rates, and indoctrinating future generations to continue believing in feminism, egalitarianism and secularism?

It is interesting that you have double spaces at the beginning of each paragraph. 

Islamic societies that is still a patriarchy continues to grow in population whereas the rest of us are in decline.

My proposal would be, take my seed without taking my financial support, you go girl, you can do it!

[Lila9]

I can't 😂😂😂

 

[Nivsch]

20 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

I can't 😂😂😂

 

Don't know why it took me 3 takes to understand all the punches and connect fully the dots. Another Great video of them 😃

Edited December 5, 2023 by Nivsch

[Lila9]

Testimonies of Hamas' acts of rape on October 7th.

*Difficult content

Edited December 17, 2023 by Lila9