posted by CenterBHSFan

I lay the bulk of the blame onto the millennial generation, to be quite frank. That's not going to seem very nice or even fair, but hear me out.

My condensed version:
History has always showcased cross dressers and trannies, but culturally acceptance was really beginning to grow in the 70's, 80's, 90's and into the 2000's (music, television, movies, books). Everybody knew that trans people existed, but nobody cared, unless you were personally into that scene. Well then enter the social media age when the Millies were coming into their own. That opened up a whole brouhaha of activism, feelings, strong-arming, etc. Millies - being resentful of the Boomers, their student loan debts, staying at home until their late 20's/early 30's, had embraced social media exponentially more than GenX did. It was the perfect storm for the modern form of activism. They had a harder time being stoic and while they were being tremendously innovative in the tech world, they were fairly listless in the mundane parts of life. And who can blame them, really? Everybody likes the convenience of sharing their thoughts into the void, internet consumerism and so on. So where to focus all this extra energy? That's when and where the race to become the most open-minded, the most libertine, the most caring, etc. really amped up. Political ideologues rather quickly recognized this as a ripe moment to seize a new generation so they did; sometimes purposeful but sometimes accidental. Strategically speaking, it was rather artful and amazingly fast and how successful it has turned out to be.
But once they got on a roll, there was no way to stop it. Now we are seeing the consequences of not being able to curb enthusiasms. Even saying things like "I draw a hard line to this when it comes to kids" gets people upset. We've seen it shown on this very forum. Not even a little bit of pushback is acceptable to these people. It has to be all or nothing.

Of course, there are a lot of things left out of the condensed timeline I listed and as far as ideologues go, the conservatives also shot themselves in the foot many times. That cannot be denied. As part of the "middle child/ignored" GenX, that's just the way I've seen things played out. Others will naturally see things in a different way and so what? 

Hi, a "millie" here, born 1984. Thanks for repeating things I have been hearing for almost 20 years. It was BS then and is BS now. Painting an entire generation with a broad brush like that is lazy. It is really easy to cherry pick to make the author's overall political point. 

Generations are large, diverse, and cannot and do not fit into one box to make whatever ideological point you are trying to make. 

posted by CenterBHSFan

Hard times create strong men
strong men create good times
good times create weak men
weak men create hard times

I was just reminded of this and it got me thinking "is this true or even kinda true?"

I am not so sure. Thinking back across the past 50 years and it seems spot on. It could just be because history is generally in the habit of repeating itself in various forms. Fashion does the same thing, as another example. I can't be bothered to go rummaging around in the attic looking for my old books from college to reference anything that supports it. One of these days I'll have to put them into their own containers and label them correctly, but now I'm just getting into the weeds. 
Back to the subject!

The ring of truth of it to me is the fact that society, jobs and chores were much different 40 years ago than today. I'd be willing to bet that we've currently got a crop of young men that have the softest hands in all of history. I'm not saying that the majority of all men are effeminate, but the number of physical labor jobs in the US has gone down, not to mention that the vast tech wave surely made many many things much more convenient and easy to acquire. 
Some time ago I read that over half of late teens/early 20's males don't know how to change a tire. I think in that same article I read that most young women in that same age group didn't know how to cook and something like 80% of millenial women ate out or ordered takeout the majority of the time. 

Which brings me back to the original question: Do you think that the old saying is true? 
If so, why do you think that?
If not, please explain.

Define weak and strong. 

Seems like a very lazy saying to make. 

Are science, free market, technology advancements considered weak or strong? 

posted by iclfan2

Oh. (One school, but I was assured this doesn’t happen anywhere. Even though examples exist all over in different variations).

‘Person who produces sperm’ - the new description of a boy/man in US schools. pic.twitter.com/a5PTlmAakN

— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) April 26, 2023

On the one hand you want to laugh hysterically.

On the other hand, you can only mutter "God save the Republic".

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Hi, a "millie" here, born 1984. Thanks for repeating things I have been hearing for almost 20 years. It was BS then and is BS now. Painting an entire generation with a broad brush like that is lazy. It is really easy to cherry pick to make the author's overall political point. 

Generations are large, diverse, and cannot and do not fit into one box to make whatever ideological point you are trying to make. 

I guess you didn't understand where I specifically said that it wasn't going to appear nice or fair. Or when I made the point of it being just my opinion/ancedotal. 
Yes, I condensed a lot of things. I pointed that out, too.

Generations *always* tend to differ. That's just a fact. They *are* diverse, yes. Good job in agreeing with me.

Either way, you'll be fine. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Define weak and strong. 

Seems like a very lazy saying to make. 

Are science, free market, technology advancements considered weak or strong? 

So you are so eager to get pissy with me that you missed some parts of what I have said. 
LOL

Keep going in this manner. I've got all night to have some fun!

So, Maybelline has used Dylan Mulvaney for ads (or an ad) and now there's a boycott on that too. *sigh*

This is getting to be a pattern. What is next? Victoria's Secret?

posted by CenterBHSFan

I guess you didn't understand where I specifically said that it wasn't going to appear nice or fair. Or when I made the point of it being just my opinion/ancedotal. 
Yes, I condensed a lot of things. I pointed that out, too.

Generations *always* tend to differ. That's just a fact. They *are* diverse, yes. Good job in agreeing with me.

Either way, you'll be fine. 

It's just lazy to me to say one social issue is tied to a whole generation. To even think of your post from the Twitter thread is a false and bad argument to me. One thing does not connect to the other. 

posted by CenterBHSFan

So you are so eager to get pissy with me that you missed some parts of what I have said. 
LOL

Keep going in this manner. I've got all night to have some fun!

It is a tired argument to me. I completely disagree with the whole premise or question. 

The second half of your post comparing men to previous generations is lazy as people have been making that arguments for generations and every time been wrong. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

It is a tired argument to me. I completely disagree with the whole premise or question. 

The second half of your post comparing men to previous generations is lazy as people have been making that arguments for generations and every time been wrong. 

You don't think that each generation is different because of industrial, agricultural and now technical progress happens?

posted by ptown_trojans_1

It's just lazy to me to say one social issue is tied to a whole generation. To even think of your post from the Twitter thread is a false and bad argument to me. One thing does not connect to the other. 

You could maybe display your counterargument to showcase how you are correct.

Why are we still using the One Drop Rule?

When almost all of Americans are essentially "mutts", why are we still using that social and political outdated rule to continue segregation?

Older people are always convinced the next generation is weak, lazy and deprived. Rock music, disco, long haired communists, weed, the list is infinite. I have been guilty of this myself.  In a few years it all blows over, the world doesn’t end and it becomes completely normal. 

As far as bud light, they were already in decline. Seltzers have put a huge dent and they were already losing ground on coors and miller lite from what I gather. I came across a few articles that said catering to groups that like businesses who support lgbtq is a smarter choice because that group is growing while the latter group is declining. It actually kinda made sense when they put up the numbers.  Personally I don’t like bud light or drink it unless I’m at a concert or football game and that’s what they have. 

posted by CenterBHSFan

Why are we still using the One Drop Rule?

When almost all of Americans are essentially "mutts", why are we still using that social and political outdated rule to continue segregation?

It’s pretty hard to get rid of something that has been in place for several hundred years. But we will get there. 

So, Florida Gay Pride Parade was cancelled. Apparently the legislative bills that DeSantis is expected to sign would limit attending such events to age 21. Now, I disagree with the age. I think should still be the standard. That is to say, if 18 is old enough to go kill/get killed in war, it should be old enough to go to parades of this nature. Eighteen is also the age of consent there, which does tie in to what happens at these parades. So yeah, 21 is not a number I'd agree on. 

But, other than the listed age, I do agree that kids shouldn't be flagrantly exposed to such things. I'm sure we've all seen some of the actions that happen in these things. I personally don't care what adults do with each other at these events, but come on, kids shouldn't be exposed.

The REAL question that is still in my mind is what the fuck is wrong with the parents who have brought their kids to these parades, drag shows, etc?!

posted by CenterBHSFan

The REAL question that is still in my mind is what the fuck is wrong with the parents who have brought their kids to these parades, drag shows, etc?!

It’s alway liberal white women, many probably with mental illness issues of their own. You rarely see a father at these events. Another question, why do these freaks want to sexually dance in front of little kids? (Wait until you see people using the term Minor (or Youth) attracted person. 

The weird thing is you try to Ty being gay to being a pedo. You ignore the math on that. Doesn’t make sense. 

posted by geeblock

The weird thing is you try to Ty being gay to being a pedo. You ignore the math on that. Doesn’t make sense. 

No, not gay. The letters after LGB (also not tying it, saying that it is the next group who is going to want acceptance/ inclusion). Also, I think you’ve been confused before, the way groomer is being used now is into the gender cult, not meaning groomed to be a victim of pedos. 

And I didn’t make up those terms, google it if you’d like to see some freaks. It isn’t people on the right. Things like this don’t help their case.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/transgender-minnesota-lawmaker-introduces-bill-removing-anti-pedophile-language-states-human-rights-act

posted by iclfan2

No, not gay. The letters after LGB (also not tying it, saying that it is the next group who is going to want acceptance/ inclusion). Also, I think you’ve been confused before, the way groomer is being used now is into the gender cult, not meaning groomed to be a victim of pedos. 

And I didn’t make up those terms, google it if you’d like to see some freaks. It isn’t people on the right. Things like this don’t help their case.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/transgender-minnesota-lawmaker-introduces-bill-removing-anti-pedophile-language-states-human-rights-act

I just saw about that bill earlier today. 

And yes, I know about the MAPS and how they are trying to blend in under the LGBT community. Apparently, the acronym MAPS is much more appealing language than pedo.

Woodchipper. Feet first.

posted by geeblock

The weird thing is you try to Ty being gay to being a pedo. You ignore the math on that. Doesn’t make sense. 

It’s weird that you don’t realize the letters after LGB have been trying to change the language from pedophile to “minor attracted persons”.

So whether you like it or not pedophiles are now part of the QIALMNOPRPS+ premium edition community.

Every single person I know that is LGB for more than 5 minutes can’t stand the crap going on in the rest of the alphabet soup the last couple years.

posted by jmog

It’s weird that you don’t realize the letters after LGB have been trying to change the language from pedophile to “minor attracted persons”.

So whether you like it or not pedophiles are now part of the QIALMNOPRPS+ premium edition community.

Every single person I know that is LGB for more than 5 minutes can’t stand the crap going on in the rest of the alphabet soup the last couple years.

I’m more talking about people who say “ Democrats are the party of Pedophiles” crowd. I’m not an expert in the subject but it seems to me that most of the actual pedophiles are straight older men. It’s just my opinion feel free not to respond i don’t have the energy to argue today

But lol at you using “people I know” when you guys yell at ptown for that every day even tho it makes perfect sense to use anecdotal evidence and experiences and use it to form opinions 

posted by geeblock

I’m more talking about people who say “ Democrats are the party of Pedophiles” crowd.

posted by iclfan2
That’s not what anyone is saying. Of course there are pedos of all kinds (Catholic Church, etc). The difference is most people are outraged by it. But there are people on the left who are not, and others who want to lower age of consents. Instead of being ostracized and ridiculed, some of them are published or invited to speak on college campuses and elsewhere. 

i mean people are definitely saying it..  that being said i'm not sure there is a consesus on what they are saying.  Even on this board one person is saying they arent actually into children but rather trying to groom children to get sex changes and another is saying they actually want to rape children.  I think it may have started as one thing but now the hard core righties now just label democrats as pedos...

Marjorie Taylor Greene on her new podcast: “Democrats …are a party of pedophiles.” pic.twitter.com/DyNLNWe2mD

— PatriotTakes 🇺🇸 (@patriottakes) April 20, 2023

posted by geeblock

most of the actual pedophiles are straight older men. 

 This is very much up for debate.  When >80% of Catholic priest victims are boys - for example - you can’t make blanket statements like this.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

That is not based on fact.  This is very much up for debate.  When >80% of Catholic priest victims are boys - for example - you can’t make blanket statements like this.

its an opinion for sure.  what i meant was they identify publicly as straight. 

There’s a slippery slope in here somewhere and I don’t know where the line gets drawn firmly, but an “unusual” sexual behavior one day becomes “acceptable” the next and them “perfectly normal” the next.  There are infinite letters and symbols that can be added to the moniker.  

I believe maybe a percentage or two of our population truly is gay, that true trans is probably not even measurable and primarily due to mental illness.  I think most of this shit will go away in time as people lose interest.

Idiots like MTG keep it alive every bit as much as the most attention seeking drag queen.