SJW's, Black Lives Matter, 3rd Wave Feminism and The Regressionist Left

POSTED BY: 6IXSTRINGJACK
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 16:05
VIEWED: 7866
PAGE 1 of 6

It's been a long time since I posted here. Anyone who knows me knows it's been far longer since I actually paid any attention to any news from any outlet.

These are three entirely new concepts to me up until about a week ago.

Recently, for reasons I won't detail here, I have been relegated to only YouTube as entertainment for the last week or so, and I'm LOVING it. Holy Christ on a Cross, THIS is entertainment. I had no idea how entertaining the NEWS could be when watched from the many viewpoints of completely biased individuals from every side.


I mention the three phrases in the title of this thread simply because as much as I've disagreed with anyone ever on here about anything, I can only think of one person here I've ever spoken with who was truly into any of that.

Before I posted here I looked at recent thread titles and don't even see evidence that it's really being talked about.

Aside from my new comedy channel favs, my new favorite channels are a majority women and racial minorties or both. There's even an extremely gay guy from Greece I didn't realize was gay until I saw him speaking in a video that claimed he was gay and he outwardly acted almost like a caricature of a gay man while speaking at a college campus.

I will be the first to admit that I don't favorite white males saying the same things because it's neigh impossible to label me a racist, a mysogonist or a homophobe when I'm truly such a legitimate fan of what they have to say that there's no reason to even seek out any input from the "privileged white males" on youtube for a 2nd opinion.

1. TreeOfLogic -

2. Anthony Brian Logan -

3. Lauren Southern -

4. Milo Yiannopoulos -

(I originally just posted the youtube links here, but they didn't work since they weren't video links, so unfortunately I had to pick just one video they made or a video made with them in it.)

Seriously people of FFF/RWED...

If you want to have real discussions with each other, I would suggest watching some of the videos from the people I posted here. It may sound a little counter-intuitive to anyone who doesn't know who Milo is, but I did list them in the order I felt was "most likely to use kid gloves" to "most likely to bury you alive". Who Knew? The gay dude was channeling My Cousin Vinnie....



I JUST finally discovered the WONDER of YOUTUBE after all of these years. It's not just a bunch of music videos or pirated movies or videos of crazy cats....

Honestly, the political stuff I talk about here is a minority of what I learned to love over the last few weeks. Youtube, at least for now, is that fabled Utopia of free speech and what I always said the world should be like and I didn't even know it was right there all the time.

Y'all can keep your Game of Thrones.

YouTube is so much better because YouTube is real life. You just can't make this shit up.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Does not surprise me at all that nobody has any opinions about any of this.

It's 4 videos with people who make a point to do things that are not stereotypical and fit into your happy little box of what is and what isn't.

The lefties don't want to believe that women and minorities and gays could actually have such opinions, and the righties just downright don't trust them.



The utter silence after this post for 2 days is the reason I left here.

The RWED is, and always was, just a bunch of narrow minded individuals who would never change.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

FWIW I dropped cable nearly 15 years ago. There are so many things on youtube from educational to entertaining and everything in between. Just recently, though, there is the warning signs that they are going to being restricting the monetization on videos that Anita Sarkeesian SJW-types don't like:

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Well, let's see BLM, that is so yesterday's news. That movement is definitely misguided, but no more than the "open carry" folks and the
Bundy supporters out west who break the law and abuse their rights as "citizens."

Yes, I believe that black helicopters are armed & ready to go at a moments notice. Same mentality. Different approaches and different outcomes. But all
are troublemakers. There are other ways to bring attention to the plight of
people of color getting shot while severely unarmed. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for law & order - shoot the motherfuckers who break the law, especially
those who kill and hurt innocent people just going about their lives.

Especially those that hurt young children. Fuck 'em, shoot them dead. But so
too the stupid motherfuckers that go around claiming that they are being
treated differently because the government is giving things away to freeloaders. This guy Bundy stood on the principle that he wasn't going to pay the Feds because he didn't recognize their authority. What a bunch of horseshit!

But I do appreciate that guy Anthony that ran the video of the New Orleans
man who questioned the Black Panthers and BLM for not supporting the black
community in their real time of need. That I agree with 1000%. It is foolish to pretend to be for your community and then not support that community
when the chips are down. I applaud him for posting that video. Also the
retired cop, she had some good points. The BLM folks don't know how to go about protesting and channeling their energies in a positive manner. It is
part that and part built up frustration toward the system. Doesn't excuse it, but there you have it. They are in need of some serious leadership.

Had they handled their shit, and presented their protests constructively,
they would have my vote. So, no.....they don't have a good strategy. I've
spoken to my black friends and they don't like what they see either. Stopping folks from going to work is not going to get you any sympathy,
only very pissed-off people. And the campaign interruptions are stupid and unproductive. Scaring a bunch of folks at a rally will get you attention, but very much in the wrong way. You want folks to back your cause, not be afraid or confused by it.

But they are very much like Trump at his rallies. Safe and stupid. Again, you want to work with people, not insult, confuse and intimidate. Trump talks down to blacks and Hispanics; so does the BLM. they both choose a
soft audience that they could manipulate - in Trump's case: he appeals to the pissed-off white man who has fears off losing their privilege in this
country. BLM appeals to the pissed-off blacks that blame everything on the "white" man. Little do both of them know that they have a common enemy. The System. Powerful people use it to their advantage; to maintain the status quo. The rich get richer baby!

Perfect example: Bernie Madoff.


SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Does not surprise me at all that nobody has any opinions about any of this.

It's 4 videos with people who make a point to do things that are not stereotypical and fit into your happy little box of what is and what isn't.

The lefties don't want to believe that women and minorities and gays could actually have such opinions, and the righties just downright don't trust them.



The utter silence after this post for 2 days is the reason I left here.

The RWED is, and always was, just a bunch of narrow minded individuals who would never change.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

It's not that I don't have an opinion, it's just that I was busy, and this is a really complex topic.

First of all, let me say that every objective study of bias says that bias exists.

Comparing the peer reviews or grant proposals or job evaluations which are evaluated "blinded" (i.e. gendered names removed) versus the same papers/ proposals that are evaluated with gendered names shows that women have to be roughly SEVEN TIMES better than their male counterparts to achieve the same result. There are just waaaaay too many studies on that topic to refute the findings. I'm just going to link a couple, but there are many more.

https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/academicpersonnel/documents/Rising_Above
_Unconscious_Bias.pdf
https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mckinley/notes/snodgrass-sigmod-2006.p
df

If you want personal observation, there is the experience of a female-to-male transgender scientist who has lived and worked as both female male, and what he says is

Quote:

---

Where Summers sees innate differences, Barres sees discrimination. As a young woman – Barbara – he said he was discouraged from setting his sights on MIT, where he ended up receiving his bachelor’s degree. Once there, he was told that a boyfriend must have solved a hard math problem that he had answered and that had stumped most men in the class. After he began living as a man in 1997, Barres overheard another scientist say, “Ben Barres gave a great seminar today, but his work is much better than his sister’s work.

---

http://psychcentral.com/news/2006/07/13/gender-bias-from-scientist-who
-knows-both-sides/93.html

Some of the greatest advances in recent science, like CRISPR, were invented by women, but are barely acknowledged in popular culture. Some males tend to turn every interaction into a gladiatorial contest, whether it is interacting online or fighting for research funding.

Same thing with "people of color" and rental, jobs, loans, etc. If you send in "test couples" with the exact same financial history, the lightest skins get the best responses. Again, there are far too many studies to credibly dispute the notion.

I can point any number of biases that work the same. And the response that a minority, or even a disadvantaged majority (women) should be able to "do for themselves" or re-create an entire economy for themselves is ludicrous. On the other hand, endless whining and focusing on EXTREMELY trivial aspect of prejudice ("micro-aggressions" "micro-invalidations") and other politically-incorrect language expressions of prejudice are equally ludicrous. Just listening to "social justice warriors" makes ME want to bang my head against a wall.

Also, that doesn't mean that minorities and disadvantaged majorities don't have their own prejudices against whites, men, or even against themselves. But their biases are less consequential, since they don't have the power and wealth to impose their views on the more powerful.

So, in the "ideal" world, we would all be free to pursue whatever we were individually best at, and would be evaluated only on merit, whether it is financial merit (for rentals, loans, and purchases) or intellectual merit (for research) or whatever merit applied to the situation.

However, all of this - eliminating prejudice, and pure meritocracy - is based on the assumption that we are all supposed to interact in an individualistic manner in a competitive environment, and that freely-competing individuals will find their best personal level and that society as a whole will benefit.

But what if society does NOT benefit from this arrangement? What if brilliant computer programmers are needed to grow food, and brilliant female (and male) researchers are needed to be great parents?

All I'm doing is pointing out that these discussions are based on some pretty unfounded assumptions. Like I said, it's a complex topic and I don't have time to engage in it.



--------------
I think

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

"Some of the greatest advances in recent science, like CRISPR, were invented by women ..."

That fantabulous flyby of Pluto that got all those wonderful photos and that remarkable data? The head honcho was a woman. Just sayin'

---

---

---

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THX:
FWIW I dropped cable nearly 15 years ago. There are so many things on youtube from educational to entertaining and everything in between. Just recently, though, there is the warning signs that they are going to being restricting the monetization on videos that Anita Sarkeesian SJW-types don't like:

---

I haven't watched anything outside of Youtube in about 2 months now. I'm subscribing to another person almost every day. It's really amazing what is out there to see on YouTube when you're not filling it up with professionally produced TV shows.

I'm actually well aware of the current Youtube scare of de-monitization on Youtube videos. They are now "following through" on new policies they stated to users over a year ago. I've seen users from several of my subscriptions say that they were effected, but they got their videos re-monitized after they underwent "human review". Granted, these were larger sites with a pretty big following. Who's to say how many people with only 1-5, subscribers are fairing?

I think the most well thought out video on that topic comes from TopHatsandChampagne...

Without ever referencing "Chicken Little", he does a good job of telling you not to freak until you've got more information. And trust me when I say that he is one of the first on the front lines that the SJWs would want to stifle.

My favorite video on the topic is by Penguinz0, called "Youtube Friendly Video":

Super Duper Fun! :)


Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well, let's see BLM, that is so yesterday's news. That movement is definitely misguided, but no more than the "open carry" folks and the
Bundy supporters out west who break the law and abuse their rights as "citizens."

Yes, I believe that black helicopters are armed & ready to go at a moments notice. Same mentality. Different approaches and different outcomes. But all
are troublemakers. There are other ways to bring attention to the plight of
people of color getting shot while severely unarmed. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for law & order - shoot the motherfuckers who break the law, especially
those who kill and hurt innocent people just going about their lives.

Especially those that hurt young children. Fuck 'em, shoot them dead. But so
too the stupid motherfuckers that go around claiming that they are being
treated differently because the government is giving things away to freeloaders. This guy Bundy stood on the principle that he wasn't going to pay the Feds because he didn't recognize their authority. What a bunch of horseshit!

But I do appreciate that guy Anthony that ran the video of the New Orleans
man who questioned the Black Panthers and BLM for not supporting the black
community in their real time of need. That I agree with 1000%. It is foolish to pretend to be for your community and then not support that community
when the chips are down. I applaud him for posting that video. Also the
retired cop, she had some good points. The BLM folks don't know how to go about protesting and channeling their energies in a positive manner. It is
part that and part built up frustration toward the system. Doesn't excuse it, but there you have it. They are in need of some serious leadership.

Had they handled their shit, and presented their protests constructively,
they would have my vote. So, no.....they don't have a good strategy. I've
spoken to my black friends and they don't like what they see either. Stopping folks from going to work is not going to get you any sympathy,
only very pissed-off people. And the campaign interruptions are stupid and unproductive. Scaring a bunch of folks at a rally will get you attention, but very much in the wrong way. You want folks to back your cause, not be afraid or confused by it.

But they are very much like Trump at his rallies. Safe and stupid. Again, you want to work with people, not insult, confuse and intimidate. Trump talks down to blacks and Hispanics; so does the BLM. they both choose a
soft audience that they could manipulate - in Trump's case: he appeals to the pissed-off white man who has fears off losing their privilege in this
country. BLM appeals to the pissed-off blacks that blame everything on the "white" man. Little do both of them know that they have a common enemy. The System. Powerful people use it to their advantage; to maintain the status quo. The rich get richer baby!

Perfect example: Bernie Madoff.


SGG

---

BLM was completely new to me. I haven't watched news in about 15 years. I don't read news. I really don't know shit about whats going on in the "Real World" unless friends or co-workers or family tell me about it.

No joke, and I'm sure I said something about it here. The BP catastrophe happened like over a month before I went home and my Grams was watching Fox News and I was like "WHAT THE F**K!!!!" while watching Earth gushing thousands of gallons of black blood into the ocean every second and this had been going on for almost 4 weeks and I never heard about it.




I really enjoyed reading your reply though SGG. I agree with practically everything you had to say about everything.

My only argument with what you had to say would be "in Trump's case: he appeals to the pissed-off white man who has fears off losing their privilege in this country".

Not that this isn't the end goal of Trumps campaign,

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME