AshZeCat In reply to Skargill [2015-02-05 06:47:21 +0000 UTC]

Yo, is his birthday really April 20?
Because of course, that's "someone else's" birthday. O_o

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to DanileeNatsumi [2014-05-14 23:30:15 +0000 UTC]

apologies for the late reply. Thanks, and fun drawing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to ComradeSch [2014-05-15 22:27:40 +0000 UTC]

Actually, the black rose has a bit of history to it. The Rose clenched in a fist has long been a symbol of socialism, and Black the color of anarchism. For years, Black Rose was the name of an anarchist newspaper. Also, in Irish history, the black rose was a symbol of Irish Nationalism (more accurately self-determinism than nationalism), from a song called "Róisín Dubh," which started out as a love song, but it's meaning changed over time.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ComradeSch In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2014-05-15 22:35:44 +0000 UTC]

Good to know. I like history.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to The-Psychonaut [2013-10-29 02:19:39 +0000 UTC]

First, I would like to mention, telling me to read a particular book is not debating. If you make the argument made in the book, use the evidence provided, and cite the book as a source, that's one thing, but simply asking your opponent to read it, is poor form, and does nothing for your point. 

I would like you to cite your sources for your statistics btw. I for one have heard the contrary, that single mother's have been hit the hardest. A combination of poor or non-existent access to reproductive health services, Insurance premiums being higher for women 1 which isn't even counting the added cost of maternity coverage, as well as the gender wage gap, where women are paid 80% less on average for the same job and level of training,2 as well as often being pushed off into lower paid positions. 3

also, the idea that men must hide their feelings and aren't harmed by women is an idea of patriarchy. Patriarchy insists that women are inferior, and thus weaker and can't harm men, which is why men are often embarrassed to admit spousal abuse.  Women however, are often reject from society, blamed, or assaulted when they come forward against spousal abuse or are often economically dependent. 4  

Again, as with war, men are assumed to be stronger, however, military studies have shown that the real gap is psychological not physiological, which can again, be explained by the fact the patriarchy reinforces the idea that women are physically inferior to men, even though there is no medical explanation for the physical fitness gap. This also applies to women being rescued, as women are again viewed as weaker and in need of men to protect them.

Once again, in the case of the pedophilia, patriarchy is to blame. The whole "boys will be boys" excuse for everything from rough housing, to rape. That men somehow can't control their sexual urges. 

1 www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/hea…

2 www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook-2…

3 www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307…

4 jech.bmj.com/content/58/7/536.…

One a side note, I do disagree with his blocking policy. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Psychonaut In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2013-10-29 02:53:08 +0000 UTC]

 Sigh. Firstly,  I did cite my statistic, extensively. Whether or not you're willing to listen to a books on tape sitting right on my profile page isn't for me to walk you through. I can only offer so many Lincoln logs  before I have to leave you to build the cabin. And actually it's not a poor argument, it's an argument period. It's a cogent statement backed extensively by facts cited from a verifiable source/s...I don't know what else you're looking for, a power point? Dr. Warren Farrel is a legended former feminist turned egalitarian and men's rights activist. The information on the "wage gap" is in his Toronto lecture. My source is the professional.

 Also nothing you've said  barring those four sources on one issue is backed by anything period. Also you're using journalists I'm using actually dyed in the wool professionals, not tourists to support my claims.  So kindly don't posture that I'm somehow throwing numbers and names into the ether: I gave you sources and I gave you my arguments extrapolated from that intel. You however seem to be content to spit rhetoric with nary a source to its name. You're peddling sound bites, sir; and adding a lot of "I heard's and 'studies have shown's with nothing in the way of evidence. Even now you're just spitting more sound bites and slogans. Nothing--save those 4 links, in the way of substantial, verifiable facts.

 Patriarchy, patriarchy, patriarchy. That's all you feminist can say. How 'bout standing up to someone who won't buy your college-wrought twoddle? PROVE IT. If you're going to affront me for having a penis then I want to see some damn good reasons why I shouldn't write you off as a hate monger, a misandric and a self hating mangina, drunk on the psychological pornography that is chivalry.

 Incidentally, I don't approve of him blocking me. I think he's a fucking coward and a fascist and a hypocrite who can't stand up for his own opinions. I didn't inundate him , I was discussing something with you: something as a commentator I had a right to do.

 He said "feminism is the idea that women are people" when that is simply a falsehood. Feminism is not egalitarianism; they are not the same, that's a lie. Feminism is a political group that believes in theorems like patriarchy and rape culture as its academic bedrock: both of which are laughably inaccurate, as any historian worth his salt can tell you. Rape has never been, in western society, been endorsed: it has always, always, always been vilified. The definition of rape has been refined but that doesn't mean it was ever deemed acceptable in the U.S.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to The-Psychonaut [2013-11-18 01:24:08 +0000 UTC]

sorry, but you cited a book. as for my cites, a few were thesis's by college students studying these exact subject. 

also, loosing privileges is not equivalent to being oppressed. going from 80% likely to be picked for a job because you have a penis, to 60% likely is not oppression. 

also, some forms of rape, is seen as an act of aggression on weaker women, and thus why it is frowned upon, even then however, you'll see a significant amount of victim blaming going around, such as the case of the media's tears for those boys who raped an unconscious girl and talking about how their lives are ruined, yet neglecting the serious psychological and social impact on the victim. There are also the "she's asking for it" argument , usually in regards to women wearing revealing clothing. Also, the kind of rape that is not looked down upon, and even celebrated is rape that involves other forms of pressure and means of coercion, like the classic, getting a woman drunk to have sex with her. Anyone drunk is not in a state to be making rational decisions, so how one give consent in such a condition. Frequently, women are put in the position where the man, and even society, feels that she somehow owes the man sex, which is the oh so frequent "friendzone" nonsense. She don't owe you sex for being friendly, she owes you her friendship for being friendly, and that's why y'all are friends. Sure, she may have a bad taste in guys, but that's her decision now isn't it?

also, chivalry is kind of based on the idea that women are inherently weak and need defending, which is also kind of sexist.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to BullMoose1912 [2013-04-21 14:09:18 +0000 UTC]

Yep. One time, back in high school, a kid drew a pot leaf on the board, and wrote 420, and when asked by the teacher when he came back, the kid said, "It's his birthday and I love Canada."

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BullMoose1912 In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2013-04-21 16:21:47 +0000 UTC]

So I guess you'd better move to Colorado so you can celebrate your birthday right.
But that means your birthday is the same as Hitlers!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to BullMoose1912 [2013-04-21 18:03:58 +0000 UTC]

Honestly, never been interested in pot. And unfortunately yes, me, the aryan, shares a birthday with Hitler. At least George Takei makes it better. Ironic sharing a birthday with the face of Fascism, considering I'm an anarchist.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BullMoose1912 In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2013-04-21 22:26:34 +0000 UTC]

So Nazis celebrate Hitler the same day stoners celebrate weed.
I've always found that weird.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to DanileeNatsumi [2013-04-21 15:01:06 +0000 UTC]

Dankeschön I spent my day in a den of radicals up in Baltimore. Was fun.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to FireFiriel [2012-12-10 18:54:15 +0000 UTC]

Just another bourgeois politician. Continuation of neo-colonial policies, expansion of a surveillance state, etc. I do appreciate taking a firm stance on social spending policies that float struggling families, however, they're just temporary solutions. The focus has been so much on taxation and spending, rather than focus on any labor policies (aside from the Lilly Ledbetter act) or anything to curb day trading (day trading forces businesses to constantly be in profit, preventing any solid long term investments) nothing that breaks down the big corporate oligopolies like the Glass-Steagall act etc. And with all of these strikes, like the Walmart workers or the fast food workers in New York, where's they're support? if he was truly a socialist president, we would have seen support for the labor movement.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FireFiriel In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2012-12-10 22:30:40 +0000 UTC]

Indeed, I see. That is informative and gratifying to hear. Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to Axcido [2012-12-10 18:54:28 +0000 UTC]

Dankeschön

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to Paulwe [2012-11-21 16:52:25 +0000 UTC]

I'm amazed that you recognized "yours in revolution" as a Jack London reference. Most people don't even know that he was a socialist politician, let alone be able to recognize an otherwise mundane signiture as a refrence to an essay by Jack London.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Paulwe In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2012-11-22 01:41:57 +0000 UTC]

Thank you. I'm a fan of his literature and when reading about him I came across a copy of his speech "Revolution", and from there I basically ended up reading most of his social/political writing. He was a pretty interesting guy.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to BullMoose1912 [2012-04-21 04:23:51 +0000 UTC]

Danke schoen

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to DanileeNatsumi [2012-04-21 02:49:48 +0000 UTC]

Danke schoen

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DanileeNatsumi In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2012-04-21 02:52:53 +0000 UTC]

Bitte schön.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to BullMoose1912 [2012-04-13 21:32:20 +0000 UTC]

Oh yea, It would be fantastic if the IWW managed to unionize the IWW. The IWW has pretty much started a campaign to unionize service industries like in retail or food service, since that has become such a huge part of the working class. I've been trying to get some information from a friend of mine that is organizing the Jimmy Johns union so I can start a campaign here on DA with CPDA and Socialist-Anarchists to do the graphics portion of the campaign, you know, website designs, posters, info-graphics etc.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BullMoose1912 In reply to The-Laughing-Rabbit [2012-04-13 21:59:22 +0000 UTC]

Yep. Where trade unions fail, I guess it's up to industrial unions.

Though from the Baristas I've talked to, none (or very few, I don't remember) of them even know about the Starbucks union. They might join if they know it exists.

Supposedly, the IWW has around 11,000 members worldwide, many fewer than the AFL-CIO for example. It would probably be more if more people knew it still existed, and also because unionization is much less in America than in other countries, despite 60 million Americans wanting to join a union but not being able to. [link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Laughing-Rabbit In reply to BullMoose1912 [2012-04-14 03:56:47 +0000 UTC]

The IWW has been pretty much laying it low over the years, but with all of the anti-union legislation like in Wisconsin, and the Occupy movement, the IWW has revitalized a little bit, even with the AFL taking it's spot light.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0