I was talking to a feminist yesterday and I wrote this in response to their messages. They were messaging me because I made a post saying I have sympathy for brock turner. There was a lot of discussion leading up to this, but this is what concluded the conversation basically, nothing has come after this and idk if I'll get a response.
That post makes you look like a depressed teenage nihilist m8.
social media was a mistake
>>1419594
>blogposting this hard
This isn't /pol/, nobody cares or is gonna suck your dick for your online activites
>>1419718
I just wanted to hear people's thoughts on the actual writing, prick.
>>1419729
You didn't said so in your OP and desu a lot of /pol/ threads starts like this.
Your writing borders on sophistry at times and half the time you seem more inclined to talk about yourself and your views rather the issue(whatever the issue is, your writing is really fuzzy on the issue itself)
>>1419740
Again with the really lame equivocal statements. If you think I'm convinced and have changed my mind because of this post, you're just a fucking moron. Are you a moron, or do you know that what you said contains you substance and no counter argument?
>>1419729
>He a good white boy he dindu nothing or how i learned to stop hating rapists and love Sartre
>>1419749
>you substance
no substance*
>>1419749
I was commenting on the quality of your writing. Isn't that you wanted?
>>1419755
A lot of people have told me they wholeheartedly disagree on my point of view, and I want someone to tell me why I'm wrong to think what I do. I just want to see someone try.
I got bored reading the first paragraph and stopped.
>>1419757
You didn't even post the entire conversation between the feminist or what your post 'saying I have sympathy for brock turner'. It is not fair to snip the last part of the argument and dare everyone else to refute it. If you want people to agree with you and suck your dick, there is always >>>/pol/
As already your poor quality of writing makes it hard to decipher what you are saying or want to say anyway that makes refuting it hard.
>>1419594
Your writing seems very limpwristed. Stop saying "in my opinion" and "I believe" every other sentence. We know it's all your opinion, just say it once and no more..
Also stop referring to yourself so much, it's unnecessary. Don't waver in your statements. Declare them unequivocally and without doubt. There is no place for doubt in a discussion/debate with a woman, you must make up your mind entirely beforehand and argue it without further qualification. To do otherwise will be perceived as weakness.
Also don't do what I have just done, don't write too much; it makes them think that you care what they think, and if you care what a random woman like them thinks then you are basically a numale. Always let a woman know that they are replaceable.
>>1419757
Your whole "WHAT IS MORALITY DUDE?" rant is sophomoric and embarrassing. Arguing for subjective morality isnt a bad thing but when youre talking about somebody whos raping people behind dumpsters its a bad time to jump on the soap box.
>>1419762
>>1419773
I would argue for subjective morality no matter how bad the offense. I argue the same thing for literally anyone; Jeffery Dahmer, Richard Ramirez, Ted Bundy, Peter Scully, John Gacy, etc.
>>1419779
if you don't believe anyone can be immoral then in what sense do you believe in any morality, subjective or not
>>1419785
I believe that you should always push against the notion of morality, to the point where it's absolutely necessary to use morality for the safety of people. I believe that the justice system is a necessary evil, like money, because without it it would be difficult for society to function. But, it should always be pushed back, because ultimately it's just a means of controlling others, there should always be an attempt to understand and dissolve the problem without use of justice.
>>1419790
>I would argue for subjective morality
>I believe that you should always push against the notion of morality
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
>>1419805
Yeah, what the hell did I say that doesn't make sense? Morality is just a tool which I don't agree with, just like I don't agree with money. Are you a fucking moron? Don't just jump to these knee jerk conclusions after you come home from summer school and want to jump right into a discussion to seem smart.
first and foremost this
>>1419613
and this >>1419750
>>1419762
also kindof this (although i did finish reading it)
>>1419758
based of your remarks here >>1419749 here>>1419729
and >>1419757
in addition to the original post, makes it quite clear that you're an annoying person who cant stand being critiqued at all. Your post basically abuses subjective morality. it goes without saying that everybody is a product of their experiences and that morality is subjective, but that doesnt make rape justified at all, ever.
why would these girls respond? how would anyone ever be able to tell you you're wrong??
Woul;d you feel bad for me if a raped ur mum, stole your tv, got you fired from your job, burnt down your house, and cut off ur johnson????? if the answer is yes please just kill yourself because you are the human equivelent of an unsalted french fry. Maybe you would feel bad, but that woulnt stop you from pursueing justice and celebrating when it is served
>>1419816
Way to miss the entire point.
>>1419811
> Morality is just a tool which I don't agree with, just like I don't agree with money.
ok i'm not that easy to bait chuckles you got two (you)s out of me and you get a third but that's it
>>1419825
>it must have happened to you anon
>anon it's never happened to you, if you did you'd shut the fuck up
So what's it gonna be anon? I'm getting two very conflicting messages from both sides.
>>1419821
what is your point exactly??
>Morality is just a tool which I don't agree with, just like I don't agree with money.
>I believe that the justice system is a necessary evil, like money, because without it it would be difficult for society to function.
>>1419828
>projecting this hard
seems like feminists got your panties in a knot bud
>>1419830
Would you agree that some things happen, which don't have a positive outcome, because the alternative wouldn't lead to a positive outcome either? SPOILER: There is no positive outcome, with the current level of sophistication of our society. Maybe once artificial intelligence comes along, and human beings augment their brains to be 10x smarter, then maybe we could live in a society where the justice system isn't necessary. The justice system is archaic, it's draconian, it's unfair and unfortunate, because no one asks to be born into a world where they have to obey the law, no one asks to be born into a world where there's consequences whether you want there to be or not.
>>1419841
Man you're as insufferable as Schopenhauer. Nobody asks to be born. So what, who cares? You can't go blaming the demiurge because you hate living in this current world. Stop hiding behind pretenses.
Either you don't believe that this current justice system is good or you don't believe in justice. If the latter then talking about unfairness is retarded, if the former then state specifics that are unfair.
>>1419841
>The justice system is archaic, it's draconian
everything built by humans is dated, flawed, and doomed to swiftly become irrelevant
>it's unfair and unfortunate, because no one asks to be born into a world where they have to obey the law, no one asks to be born into a world where there's consequences whether you want there to be or not.
no one asks to be born at all. we dont have a justice system because we want things to be fair. we (in theory) have a justice system because we dont want people to murder, rape, and steal.
>There is no positive outcome
on a long enough timeline, there is no positive or negative, everything evens out. However within a short time line there is positive and neutral. Human beings have short lifespans, and therefore jailing a rapist does produce a positive in that he wont be able to rape again (as rapist have a high tendency to do)
>>1419854
>State specifics that are unfair
punishment, being born.
>>1419855
i meant positive, negative, neutral...not just positive and neutral
>>1419858
if being born, I.E. existing, I.E. the one thing that anybody is allowed to opt out of at anytime they want, is unfair, then what, pray tell is fair?
>>1419866
I can't answer a question like that, that's like answering what is the meaning of life. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSrL0BXsO40
>>1419854
>Nobody asks to be born. So what, who cares?
>>1419854
>>1419841
>I don't agree with the concept of morality
>The justice system is unfair
What the fuck are you even babbling about mate? How can you possibly criticise something for being unfair if you don't believe in morality and hence shouldn't give two shits about whether something is unfair or not, so long as it's not unfair to you?
This doesn't make any fucking sense whatsoever.
>>1419594
i aint reading all that shit
bottom line it for me in 3 meme arrows or less
>>1419594
attempting to understand morals in terms of atoms or similar is just a category error
>>1420341
>missing the point
>>1420291
I explained this when I said I don't think justice is a good outcome and I don't think the alternative is a good outcome either.
