Google Memo

[Speaker to Animals]

White knighting is all he knows. He was raised like this. No fixing it now. He has to get thrown under the bus himself before he begins to see the problem. You can't otherwise reach guys like this.

[Martin Hash]

The whole idea behind the "war against men" is to obfuscate what the true intentions are: Collectivism. Reversal of power & control.

Would you modify a winning strategy? You can't be rational with intentionally irrational people.

Playing into their narrative would be a mistake, as even the most cursory reading of Sun Tzu would demonstrate. Never let your opponent control the terrain.
You buy into the SJW's ground rules, you're playing on their terrain.
You're not going to beat them on their own turf.

So, the current strategy of doing nothing is "winning"?

No, you must identify your enemy & their tactics before you can defeat them.

There are LOTS of women (like my wife, and apparently 53% of White women) who will be on our side. You can rename the battle if you don't like "war against men." Got any ideas?

[DBTrek]

White knighting is all he knows. He was raised like this. No fixing it now. He has to get thrown under the bus himself before he begins to see the problem. You can't otherwise reach guys like this.

I see StA is still trying to recruit his army of fellow losers by . . .doing what again?
Ah, throwing a man under the bus.

How big is your loser army these days StA?
Still zero?
Damn, that's a shame.

Well, keep at it.
Just because you've failed for the last 10 years doesn't mean you'll fail for the next 10.
It only means you're likely to fail for the next 10.
But you're pretty pro at failing by now, so no worries.

[pineapplemike]

I tried listening to the Molyneux and Peterson interviews with the Google guy but I found him to be quite boring, as opposed to this thread on the other hand which has been rather entertaining

[DBTrek]

So, the current strategy of doing nothing is "winning"?

No, you must identify your enemy & their tactics before you can defeat it.

There are LOTS of women (like my wife, and apparently 53% of White women) who will be on our side. You can rename the battle if you don't like "war against men." Got any ideas?

It's the same war it's always been - war against traditional values and society. Free speech is on the chopping block, isn't that a little more relatable than men vs women? The entire idea of meritocracy is under siege from identity politics. Isn't that a better way to frame the debate than "Privileged vs. oppressed"? Who will willingly ally themselves with hating free speech and people being rewarded for their works?
Almost no one.
But turn the battle into "Privileged white men oppressing minorities and creating hostile work environments for females" and suddenly half the people are ready to fall in line against free speech and meritocracy.

Clearly it's idiotic to engage these people on their own terms. Frame the debate on the right terms, win the debate before it even gets off the ground.

[Speaker to Animals]

LMFAO

DB is the "real man" for caving in to female demands.

Get over yourself. You are not making yourself better by behaving like this. It's fucking sad. Women don't respect you for it either. You are shitting all over me for doing exactly what your feminist overlords do every day, and which you support by attacking other men. Had you not considered that?

I don't begrudge women for wanting to fight for their self-interests. I begrudge you for -- like an idiot -- fighting for somebody else's interests against your own self-interest.

Stop behaving like such a rube.

[DBTrek]

LMFAO

DB is the "real man" for caving in to female demands.

Get over yourself. You are not making yourself better by behaving like this. It's fucking sad. Women don't respect you for it either. You are shitting all over me for doing exactly what your feminist overlords do every day, and which you support by attacking other men. Had you not considered that?

I don't begrudge women for wanting to fight for their self-interests. I begrudge you for -- like an idiot -- fighting for somebody else's interests against your own self-interest.

You've taken enough of a whipping, I'll let you do the third rendition of your teenage rage whine before shooing you off to your dark corner of self loathing.

Go on now, shoo.
You said your blather . . . again.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

The way I figure it, if Conor flippin' Friedersdorf over at the flippin' Atlantic is writing an op-ed about how foollish it is for journalists to call the Google Memo an 'anti-diversity screed,' the SJW qave has already crested. Low and behold, Western civilization weathered it, and we didn't even have to break up into culturally homogeneous ethno-states.

Consequently, I am having a hard time getting all worked up into a lather over this one.

[Martin Hash]

So, the current strategy of doing nothing is "winning"?

No, you must identify your enemy & their tactics before you can defeat it.

There are LOTS of women (like my wife, and apparently 53% of White women) who will be on our side. You can rename the battle if you don't like "war against men." Got any ideas?

It's the same war it's always been - war against traditional values and society. Free speech is on the chopping block, isn't that a little more relatable than men vs women? The entire idea of meritocracy is under siege from identity politics. Isn't that a better way to frame the debate than "Privileged vs. oppressed"? Who will willingly ally themselves with hating free speech and people being rewarded for their works?
Almost no one.
But turn the battle into "Privileged white men oppressing minorities and creating hostile work environments for females" and suddenly half the people are ready to fall in line against free speech and meritocracy.

Clearly it's idiotic to engage these people on their own terms. Frame the debate on the right terms, win the debate before it even gets off the ground.

Do you have an example you can point to of this strategy working? I mean, the guy at Google DID get fired. The MSM is still spewing this shit without your counter-narrative. Jordan Peterson certainly explains it in the same terms, do you think his attack is compromised?

Call a goddamn spade a spade, don't stop calling it one because someone says they are offended. They won.

[Martin Hash]

The way I figure it, if Conor flippin' Friedersdorf over at the flippin' Atlantic is writing an op-ed about how foollish it is for journalists to call the Google Memo an 'anti-diversity screed,' the SJW qave has already crested. Low and behold, Western civilization weathered it, and we didn't even have to break up into culturally homogeneous ethno-states.

Consequently, I am having a hard time getting all worked up into a lather over this one.

Dude, can you see me with your head in the sand like that?