carterfelder

Karens are hawt.

The logical fallacy being used here is the "fallacy of relative privation" (also known as the "not as bad as" fallacy). This fallacy occurs when someone dismisses an argument or issue by claiming it is insignificant compared to other, supposedly more pressing problems. Responding to valid concerns about women's privacy, safety and fair play in sports by claiming they are "minor problems" sidesteps the actual argument. It avoids engaging with the specific concerns (e.g., safety, privacy, or fairness) by redirecting attention to the perceived scale of the issue rather than addressing its merits or implications. This tactic minimizes valid concerns without providing a reasoned counterargument. Putting aside everything I've read and seen online, there have been many times I've had discussions with women I knew and didn't know who expressed disagreement with "transwomen" being in women's private spaces, as well as playing in women's sports. Yes, there are women who claim not to care very much or at all about these concerns, but that doesn't make the whole issue "minor." Transgenderism is just gender dysphoria. It's gaslighting ourselves into believing or doing our best to believe we are the opposite sex. There is no such thing. It's a fantasy, and there's absolutely no good moral reason why women should have to give up their female-only private spaces. Many women are significantly uncomfortable with the presence of a man. It does not matter how well they "pass" as a "woman." They are men and they have no right to be in women's spaces, or compete against women in female-only sports. There's a very good reason sports are often separated by sex. "Transwomen" in female prisons and prison cells is also a serious issue. Just because a man presents himself in a feminine way, or wears clothing typically associated with women, doesn't mean he has any right to make women feel uncomfortable by being in their private space. There are too many good reasons women object to males being in their changing rooms, shared public bathrooms (INCLUDING those with full, top-to-bottom toilet stalls), prisons, rape shelters, lesbian bars, etc. I also don't want any "transmen" in men's changing rooms or shared public bathrooms. I don't want a woman being concerned about me being in a private room with her. I don't want to be falsely accused of assault or sexual harassment if I don't have to be. If I ever see a transwoman entering a female private space, I will sternly ask him not to go in. I will scream at him if I have to.

I'll say this: aside from family, I refuse to be friends with anyone who thinks it's okay for non-citizens of America to enter the country illegally. The only reason people claim to support this idea is because they have a savior complex that takes over their ability to think logically about essential boundaries and fairness within a civilized society. Just because you want a perfect utopia does not mean you can have one anytime soon. If a perfectly balanced, utopian society were to exist, humanity would have to evolve psychologically to the point where that could somehow happen. The same applies to transgender ideologies' claim that "transwomen are women, so therefore, anyone who claims to be a woman—including males—can enter women's private spaces or compete against women in their sports." This bypasses objective reality to the point where it denies people—especially women—their safety, privacy, and fair play in sports.

I did notice my alter ego today, haha. His comment’s innocent and hopeful, while mine’s doubtful and sarcastic.

The DOJ's evidence suggests Tim Pool was unaware of Russian funding behind Tenet Media. There's no definitive proof he knowingly acted as a "Russian propagandist." If Cenk Uygur were funded by Hamas, I'd still listen to him if I found any value in doing so, but I only find him amusing, because he's very much a performer who caters to his audience instead of valuing critical thinking and objective truth.

"White privilege" in 2025 America is a ridiculous concept. Pretty privilege is real, but you don't see anyone complaining too much about that. Why? Because most folks understand that we can only change so much about ourselves to be more or less attractive to others. Every legal citizen in America who has a functioning brain can literally do almost anything. The only thing "holding them back" is that which they perceive as doing so. For example, usually it's their friends and family repeating unhelpful narratives, or it's how they see themselves, which isn't in a way that encourages them to face challenges in order to succeed in life. The problem many Democratic voters have is that they have a savior complex, and those that don't spend enough time around normal people (people who use common sense) may develop a white savior complex, because they've become more prejudiced than normal, thanks to watching leftist legacy media, listening to their Democratic-voting friends and family, or reading silly "antiracist" (neoracist) books like a neighborhood friend I grew up with was reading when I last saw him in a local coffee shop that sells really good coffee beans sourced from non-whites in other parts of the world.

Listen to Tim Pool. He uses critical thinking, unlike most.

Yeah, end the war, get the hostages back, then take the IDF out of GAZA, that'll solve everything. Hamas will behave themselves from then on...

To expect cops to be reasonable in a highly crime-ridden area is silly. Most of the time racism is just prejudice, and everyone is prejudiced in some way because racial patterns are real and as social humans we are programmed to judge others by looks in some sort of way before we dissolve those judgments through connection, time and trust.

I don't care about being called anything, it's just fun to pretend I'm going to be criticized for being honest about my observations and relations with black folks growing up in public schools.

The enlightened are anomalies.

I like how many Democratic voters ignore the fact that black kids struggle with education because of an unstable home life (struggling single mothers, for example) and social connections that don’t encourage doing well in school. <———— “Systemic racism” is a victimhood mindset that only hurts those who choose to identify with it.

Good to see you on here, sir. I can't even post Tim Pool on here, not that I'm protesting the forum rules. I can relate more to folks who take psychedelics than those who don't. I considered myself an "anarchist" once I started questioning things with the help of the Internets. I was probably 14 or 15. I "hated" the cops. In my mid-to-late twenties I became vegan and fell for the neo-racist, white-self-hating, you-must-feel-guilty-for-being-white propaganda. It was mostly because I was deep in my empathic self, wanting to defend who I thought were "vulnerable." But once I started questioning things, especially with the help of online influencers who had the cojones to do it, I went from, "really mom and dad, you bought a Trump hat?" in 2015, to now, with two Trump hats displayed on my living room shelves, right next to Buddha, Jesus, the Trimurti, and Mary.

Doesn't "systemic racism" just mean negative social pressure? The successful black folks I grew up with were raised by parents who encouraged them to do well in school. The unsuccessful ones were the kind of adolescents who threw cigarettes at the school bus, refusing to get on, as if to say, "y'all don't understand me, I'm skipping school because my parents don't care, and my friends would tease me if I did." Don't get on me about being racist. I had a Ghanaian-American girlfriend all through middle and high school, and the only person I cared to sit next to during elementary school lunch was an ostracized black boy with a big heart and a passion for poetry. He was teased for having a stutter, and being "slow."

No, it's perfectly fine and completely necessary.

If a man has 5 sexual partners and other men don't, is that fair? More women, more problems. More money, more problems. More possessions, more responsibility. No responsibility, no possessions.

Whether they do or don't, “The primary law of human psychology is that people judge on appearances.” - Robert Greene So, that would mean that many people certainly do identify with their look, or internalize how others perceive their look.

I thought all you male youngsters were going red? Get with the program, y'all.

Hate to break it to you but Hamas is the problem, y'all.

We've already met the aliens, they're on the other side of a fifty gram mushroom trip.

What is "too masculine?" If a man told me a woman was "too feminine" I would wrastle him to the ground.

What is the difference between a child and an adult?

This guy's great!

"Users prompted Grok to generate unfiltered content, pushing it toward inflammatory narratives. Without robust initial filters, some responses were misused. xAI has since strengthened Grok’s guardrails to prevent this." - Grok