Official Hoe Bag Bashing thread!

[Speaker to Animals]

I keep telling him it's bigoted.

[C-Mag]

This is what true Equality and Liberty is about. Everyone judged on the merits of what they do. No breaks, no different rules based on gender, race or sexual preference.

I personally have a tremendous amount of faith that people can improve, succeed, whatever............. if we take the training wheels and diapers off.

[Montegriffo]

They act like we don't also rip into betas and manginas all the time as well. They only give a shit when women are criticized. It's really fucking crazy when you look at who they are defending in this case.

Who is defending her? I'm just pointing out that this car crash of a thread is not going to help the MHF recruit or keep any female members.
Still I guess that's what some of you want anyway.

So, we need to approach females in debate with a different standard than we do men ?

That's really disgusting, and misogynistic to believe that women aren't able to handle spirited, raw debate.
Penner can handle it. I'm proud as hell of her standing in here taking a beating.

That's not what I said and you know it. I'm surprised at you resorting to SJW tactics by shouting ''mysogynistic'' and strawmanning.
I'm just saying we don't really need anymore threads for anyone to go on about how all women are evil witches out to steal your child and take your money. I don't deny that there are poor examples of womanhood like in the OP but when you start generalising about all women it just becomes sexist crap.... and that's the way most of these threads end up.

[Fife]

Is calling for thread quotas based on subject matter soft or hard sexism?

[C-Mag]

Who is defending her? I'm just pointing out that this car crash of a thread is not going to help the MHF recruit or keep any female members.
Still I guess that's what some of you want anyway.

So, we need to approach females in debate with a different standard than we do men ?

That's really disgusting, and misogynistic to believe that women aren't able to handle spirited, raw debate.
Penner can handle it. I'm proud as hell of her standing in here taking a beating.

That's not what I said and you know it. I'm surprised at you resorting to SJW tactics by shouting ''mysogynistic'' and strawmanning.
I'm just saying we don't really need anymore threads for anyone to go on about how all women are evil witches out to steal your child and take your money. I don't deny that there are poor examples of womanhood like in the OP but when you start generalising about all women it just becomes sexist crap.... and that's the way most of these threads end up.

No, no, no........... that's how we play this game right.
I've been paying attention.

I shout misogynist, and then your argument, however valid is null and void
No need to look at actual data, or proof. You are a misogynist, therefore your opinion doesn't count. Furthermore, because you are a misogynist you are 'DANGEROUS'. Therefore, I can just beat you to a pulp for merely expressing your ideas.

That's the rule book laid out by the Social Justice Crowd............... just following the rules.

[Okeefenokee]

They act like we don't also rip into betas and manginas all the time as well. They only give a shit when women are criticized. It's really fucking crazy when you look at who they are defending in this case.

Who is defending her? I'm just pointing out that this car crash of a thread is not going to help the MHF recruit or keep any female members.
Still I guess that's what some of you want anyway.

Identity politics, folks.

We don't need ideas. We need wiminz.

[BjornP]

Why do we have to bash her?

Well, if you want an objective explanation for the mechanism at play here, here's some Collectivism 101:

Individual behavior that is deemed socially harmful to the moral integrity of the collective (society, community, etc.), is usually subject to censure and condemnation. Failure to censure and condemn risks giving the offending individual the impression that his/her actions/behavior/words are acceptable and worthy of emulation, and so poses a risk to the collective's moral value and/or belief systems.

Censure and condemnation of individual behavior by the collective, is usually motivated by a need of the collective for outsiders or internal malcontents to reform themselves into, or integrate and assimilate into the collective's way of life.

By giving the collective, particularly the children belonging to the collective unit (again, society, community, etc.), the impression that the offensive individual's behavior would be acceptable to emulate, that the offensive individual's behavior is of equal value to the collective's values, the collective risks undermining its own foundational values and those values being supplanted by the values and behavior of the offensive outsider, in this case, the hoe bag's.

Also, by calling for the stigmatization of the offending individual as a hoe bag, the collective (re-)affirms its commitments to shared values and beliefs.

So, from what I'm taking away from the OP, you have a porn actress flirting online with a married man and the married man turning her down. In a society where cheating on your significant other is discouraged as immoral and wrong, the person seeking either to cheat or encourage someone to cheat is going to be subject to collective condemnation and/or some form of censure.

[SuburbanFarmer]

[C-Mag]

Well done Bjorn

Societies have always made certain selected behavior they see as non beneficial to the tribe as taboos.
In this case we have a girl who is attempting to 'steal' a man who is successful in physical performance from his current mate. That type of behavior is probably not something you want society to reinforce as positive. So some societal shaming is OK for the larger group.

Cultural Marxism seeks to break society into Tribalized units in one of the early steps of overthrowing government. Another early step is to increase sexual promiscuity and breakdown the family unit. This comes straight out of the Frankfurt School of Communism.

[Hwen Hoshino]

Why do we have to bash her?

Well, if you want an objective explanation for the mechanism at play here, here's some Collectivism 101:

Individual behavior that is deemed socially harmful to the moral integrity of the collective (society, community, etc.), is usually subject to censure and condemnation. Failure to censure and condemn risks giving the offending individual the impression that his/her actions/behavior/words are acceptable and worthy of emulation, and so poses a risk to the collective's moral value and/or belief systems.

Censure and condemnation of individual behavior by the collective, is usually motivated by a need of the collective for outsiders or internal malcontents to reform themselves into, or integrate and assimilate into the collective's way of life.

By giving the collective, particularly the children belonging to the collective unit (again, society, community, etc.), the impression that the offensive individual's behavior would be acceptable to emulate, that the offensive individual's behavior is of equal value to the collective's values, the collective risks undermining its own foundational values and those values being supplanted by the values and behavior of the offensive outsider, in this case, the hoe bag's.

Also, by calling for the stigmatization of the offending individual as a hoe bag, the collective (re-)affirms its commitments to shared values and beliefs.

So, from what I'm taking away from the OP, you have a porn actress flirting online with a married man and the married man turning her down. In a society where cheating on your significant other is discouraged as immoral and wrong, the person seeking either to cheat or encourage someone to cheat is going to be subject to collective condemnation and/or some form of censure.

Bill Clinton was not fired from his presidency. US society already said they don't care when it came to it's most prominent public figure.

Well done Bjorn

Societies have always made certain selected behavior they see as non beneficial to the tribe as taboos.
In this case we have a girl who is attempting to 'steal' a man who is successful in physical performance from his current mate. That type of behavior is probably not something you want society to reinforce as positive. So some societal shaming is OK for the larger group.

Cultural Marxism seeks to break society into Tribalized units in one of the early steps of overthrowing government. Another early step is to increase sexual promiscuity and breakdown the family unit. This comes straight out of the Frankfurt School of Communism.

Was the Frankfurt School really necessary for the loosenning of sexual morals?