Opression - SJWs vs reality

[csrdan]

my post was so damn long i got a session time out error and it's gone and i can't be bothered retyping it all just now.

@raphjd:

If the leftist on this site do respond, we will get to see some of the total fucking insanity of the left to justify this crap.

so just one thing: please do not confuse or conflate "left" with insane feminazi delusion.

and at least here in the UK, with the jokes of what pass for political parties we have, both the "left" and the "right" are either run by feministas OR live in fear of their shadow and make policy accordingly… unless you want to go into UKIP/BNP crazy-territory.

and i think actually one of the things that stings the most about feminism is the sheer and blatant hypocrisy… women got their equality and then some. the original feminists fighting for real votes and rights would be spinning in their graves at the parody of their cause that it has become.

but what does the army do when the wars are won? they are out of a job and must make new ever-trivial wars to fight to keep their inflated sense of purpose going.

we have some very serious social and economic problems that really need sorting; and the issues SJWs and feminists complain about should be so far down that priority list as to be non-issues; and i can't help but feel alot of these are eating up headlines and social-discourse-attention from real problems to be redirected onto the most trivial of matters. not having people homeless and starving would be a real nice start.

[Frederick]

@csrdan:

my post was so damn long i got a session time out error and it's gone and i can't be bothered retyping it all just now.

@raphjd:

If the leftist on this site do respond, we will get to see some of the total fucking insanity of the left to justify this crap.

so just one thing: please do not confuse or conflate "left" with insane feminazi delusion.

and at least here in the UK, with the jokes of what pass for political parties we have, both the "left" and the "right" are either run by feministas OR live in fear of their shadow and make policy accordingly… unless you want to go into UKIP/BNP crazy-territory.

and i think actually one of the things that stings the most about feminism is the sheer and blatant hypocrisy… women got their equality and then some. the original feminists fighting for real votes and rights would be spinning in their graves at the parody of their cause that it has become.

but what does the army do when the wars are won? they are out of a job and must make new ever-trivial wars to fight to keep their inflated sense of purpose going.

we have some very serious social and economic problems that really need sorting; and the issues SJWs and feminists complain about should be so far down that priority list as to be non-issues; and i can't help but feel alot of these are eating up headlines and social-discourse-attention from real problems to be redirected onto the most trivial of matters. not having people homeless and starving would be a real nice start.

First.. when you have a session time out.. if the message is still  on the screen..  try clicking on SEND again.    If you are able, cut / copy your message so that in the worst case, you just have to reinitiate it and paste your text.
If your text is NOT on the screen, press the backspace key ONE TIME.. and usually it will be there.

============
One thing I often do which nobody else seems to do is look at OTHER countries policies and analyze the results of those policies.  England is a fantastic model to study.  England used to be a massive superpower, and even up until the 1980's was still a superpower (so was Germany / West Germany).  However, they went heavily socialist, and have suffered severely and permanently as a result.  A similar phenomenon occurred in Canada.

[csrdan]

@Frederick:

and even up until the 1980's was still a superpower (so was Germany / West Germany).  However, they went heavily socialist, and have suffered severely and permanently as a result.  A similar phenomenon occurred in Canada.

i'd be interested to know what you consider "socialist" and not, and whether it conflates with communism which is very different. i think the political debate has shifted so far right since the end of WW2 era that what was once considered common-sense-centreground is now considered borderline communism. i dont think policies like free healthcare, housing subsidy and fair wages are at odds with capitalism or even remotely communistic: if anything i think they are required balanced to stop the "profit above all" nature of capitalism from going too far and leading us to a humanitarian crisis where we have more wealth AND poverty than ever at the same time. I certainly don't think the government should plan everything; just the things that are considered life essentials… food, housing, water/heat/electricity, healthcare and now internet access. These things are necessities and there is inherently no free market there. You can't vote with your wallet on those issues, they can do what they want.

also, the waning of superpowers nicely coincided with the waning of the cold war… given there was no longer a huge threat left to fight; im not sure if those associations with socialism are not tangiential or a result of the waning of wartime economy.

thing is i have no issue with capitalism (in the realm of non-essentials); but what we have now is not just capitalism but neoliberal corporatism and globalism; reeking eerily of a cyberpunk dystopia. among other things the digital technological revolution has changed the playing field almost as much as the industrial revolution.

–-

on the topic of rape, i had this nice link today from the increasingly insufferable facebook feed of feminist-homo-public-figure george takei.

http://rare.us/rare-people/marilyn-manson-breaks-up-with-longtime-bassist-following-rape-allegations/?utm_content=inf_10_3427_2&utm_source=p-facebook&utm_medium=the-social-edge&utm_campaign=influencer&tse_id=INF_a49a56f0b9ef11e78240a3a6bbddd67d

accusation. no proof. even if intercourse was proven, it is near impossible to prove lack of consent in the absence of requiring signed contracts for every sexual encounter (talk about romantic). even without any legal repercussions; the mere mention is enough to socially ruin someone. for something that cannot be proven. short of real violence and evidence…

"rape" is quickly becoming the new "witch" word. say it and the mob starts a lynching. no investigation; even questioning the validity of a woman's claims is seen as oppression and rape-apology. No; i dont believe any accusation without merit.

it's tough, because on the one hand sexual assault and violence is obviously wrong and abhorrent. On the other hand, unless there is proof of violence it's such a serious issue you can't just convict someone of something so serious and damning based on word alone (and regardless, we already have repercussions non-legal) And this can quickly become a tool to be seriously abused. Call someone who you don't like a witch and watch your enemy be destroyed by the mob.

And, in the spirit of the thread title; that is power and oppression. A man can't just accuse a woman of something and have her immediately imprisoned on only his word. "equality" my ass. and to preach that women are oppressed still is hypocrisy of the worst kind. because any one man may be capable of physically oppressing a weaker woman (or a weaker man; never mind a whale of a woman could easily physically oppress a rake such as myself) does not mean that they should have the sole capability to institute systematic legal oppression in general.

this makes me sick. not just because real people's lifes can be ruined on heresay (even if it is later investigated and acquitted, the damage is done); but because people can and do abuse something that SHOULD be taken very seriously for their own personal gain. that's a real violation of the spirit of the intent to protect women in the first place.

the idea that a woman cannot lie about these things is a joke. people can and do lie about anything that will give them an advantage. children know this: children are evil little shits. anyone in school knows how to lie to get someone "done". i dont think its farfetched to think that some women might think that "call police, have guys life ruined" might be a good idea: because it is something they CAN do, and have very little backlash for trying.

false accusation (or accusation of "rape" for far less serious offenses of harassment, or worse: simple post-regret) is ironically the greatest disrespect to real rape victims, and i am absolutely sickened by women who abuse this, not just for the obvious sake of ruining someones life; but for the women who have endured real violent sexual assault to have their case trivialised by bitches on a power trip. there are some real sick fucks out there who really do kidnap beat and violate women.

because the more trivialisations of "rape" we have, the more people will stop listening "boy who cried wolf" style, and the REAL problem will sink along with the bullshit. and that will be nothing but the feminists fault.

the rape culture is not here. but it will be; by their own making.

consent will ALWAYS be a grey area until we require written, signed contracts. word-against-word does not and should not fly in a court of law; especially in a case so serious as rape. as a society we have always been predisposed to protect women.

–-

as a last note: i really think that gay men will eventually be the last bastion of sanity against feminism (excluding those who have been drawn in by the cooption of LGB issues by feminists for their own purposes). we are the only ones who aren't beholden to the power of the pussy; and can look at these issues from the outside free from gender partisanship.

[raphjd]

I was falsely accused of raping a woman because she was pissed that my husband and I (especially me) didn't want to take her out "gay clubbing".    I had to spend nearly 24 hour in jail and was only released once the cops watched the CCTV showing I never went near the women's bathroom where she claimed the rape took place.

Nothing happened to her by the police for what she did and no lawyer wanted to touch a private/civil case against her because I would look "vindictive".

I forget the cunt feminist's name, but she said that false rape claims against men are a good learning tool for men.

[csrdan]

@raphjd:

I was falsely accused of raping a woman because she was pissed that my husband and I (especially me) didn't want to take her out "gay clubbing".     I had to spend nearly 24 hour in jail and was only released once the cops watched the CCTV showing I never went near the women's bathroom where she claimed the rape took place.

this is exactly what i mean by the disgusting behaviour of feminists demeaning and devaluing the notion of rape itself by their own schoolground dramas and trivialisations of potentially real serious matters.

the more people hear (even anecdotally) about stories like this the better. the public needs to know when this happens. it needs to be newsworthy. of course, noone will touch it for reasons you have understood.

and if nothing else, despite being maybe misguided, the efforts of good willed feminists (yeah, they do exist) is SERIOUSLY undermined by these petty vindictive bitches trying to get a cheap win; and i think the feminist lobby should seriously publicaly admonish this behaviour and all cases of it if they want their cause to be taken seriously in the long run.

as it stands, i'm glad i can see the general trend of public opinion leaning (running as fast as they fucking can) away from feminist rhetoric after it's period of "coolness". they can only cry wolf so many times before being ignored when the wolf actually comes.

@raphjd:

Nothing happened to her by the police for what she did and no lawyer wanted to touch a private/civil case against her because I would look "vindictive".

Yeah, thats not hypocritical. not like she was vindictive at all but in the end, its out to the jury. we need public opinion to understand that this can be, and IS abused. And that the ones doing damage to the "rape cause" is these women themselves… not men. awareness of it happening, from friends anecdotally and the media is needed.

@raphjd:

I forget the cunt feminist's name, but she said that false rape claims against men are a good learning tool for men.

yeah, a good learning tool that some women apparently don't view their own integrity (individually and representative of a gender as a whole) as more important than scoring a quick win. great PR…

[raphjd]

Thanks to recently laws in California, you will now get twice as much punishment for misgendering a person in a nursing home (1 year in jail and/or $1,000 fine) than you will get for intentionally spreading HIV to people without their consent/knowledge (6 months in jail).

Is there still anyone claiming these are "outliers"?

[csrdan]

@raphjd:

Thanks to recently laws in California, you will now get twice as much punishment for misgendering a person in a nursing home (1 year in jail and/or $1,000 fine) than you will get for intentionally spreading HIV to people without their consent/knowledge (6 months in jail).

Is there still anyone claiming these are "outliers"?

i didn't know this: that is seriously retarded. One of these causes bodily harm, permenant malaise, reduction of lifespan, not to mention financial medical costs. the other hurts somebody's poor feewings. jesus. i seriously weep for the capacity of humanity for basic reason these days.

besides, shouldn't this case be an issue left to "free market dynamics"? if a nursing home is not accomodating to those snowflakes, surely they can go elsewhere to a home that caters to that demographic?

i mean, i personally think the words we use to gender those are for the purposes of the communicator not the communicatee. that is, if it seems like a woman, i will call it one. if it seems like a man, i will call it one. i dont think about it, its subconscious.

not all languages have such distinction; and it doesn't mean much. in german a kitchen is female. in chinese "he/she/it/xe/wtfbbq" are all said "tā" with no distinction. in japanese there are a plethora of pseudo-pronouns that reflect subtly the gender (but more importantly, the social dyamic) between the parties, even for likes like "I, you" never mind "he/she/it"

the point of transgender "passing" is that they automatically register as their intended gender in the minds of others without coersion. and this is a process that does not happen on the logical/conscious level. it's an instantaneous recognition of uncountable features both learnt and hardwired into us. as an anecdote i find it interesting that only woman at a club i actually found attractive and enticing, i later found is trans. she passed well, i didn't know and would have been surprised to find a dick, but clearly my subconscious recognised her "maleness" in attitude, dancing, energy… whatever it is that we notice but don't consciously know.

it's ludicrous to think that you can legally force someone to recognise someone else's opinion. i'm not expert but that sounds unconstitutional and oppression of free speech or worse, free thought!

I really did not know it's gotten that bad in places in the US. I do know the insanity is rife in canadian poltics though.

–-

btw, the whole reason i wanted to call you out on conflating "left" with this dogma is that associating this feminist insanity with what i think are common-sense good social and economic policies (banking reform, housing/healthcare, fair wages, low/no income support (in the face of not just industrial, but service-level automation), collecting tax on corporate multinationals like apple, google etc...) with what is quite frankly, serious break from reality; is character assasination by tangiential association; and ignores the fact that many right wing (but not extreme RW loony for different reasons) institutions and parties follow the exact same feminist dogma.

this is a cancer on society and the rhetoric of public discourse as a whole. it is not a left wing problem, it has been coopted. the sooner we realise who and what we are fighting the better. the very fact that it is unironically termed "social justice" is a bigger irony of itself. the sentence for misgendering vs AIDS is an example of obvious misjustice. (although, i wouldn't be surprised if the fine is issued in all cases rather than a prison sentence, but that it is even capable of being considered a criminal rather than civil case is absolutely bonkers)

i have lost some otherwise very good friends to this (come back after a year trip to find they were indoctrinated out of common sense by uni-girls; and THEY ostracised me not the other way around)

to me, the best you can ask for wrt. inclusiveness is to not harass, demean etc. you can't force someone to LIKE or agree with something; merely "tolerate it"

and the word "tolerance" is being criminally abused for political ends. you tolerate a stinky hobo on the bus. you aren't expected to whiff in the aroma and comment how it is pleasing, but at best retain that oh so british stiff-upper-lip and deal with it so long as you are not actually being harmed.

[cteavin]

@csrdan:

@raphjd:

I was falsely accused of raping a woman because she was pissed

this is exactly what i mean by the disgusting behaviour of feminists demeaning and devaluing the notion of rape itself…

the more people hear (even anecdotally) about stories like this the better. the public needs to know when this happens. it needs to be newsworthy. of course, noone will touch it for reasons you have understood.

---

i'd be interested to know what you consider "socialist" and not, and whether it conflates with communism which is very different.

I agree with most of what the main posters are talking about here but you're ironically doing exactly what you're criticising.

csrdan came here to point out that we shouldn't conflate leftist politics with the SJW movement in the same way that we shouldn't do so with socialism and communism.

There are four waves of feminism. The first gave women the right to vote and helped push Prohibition because drunk men beat women; the second pushed/pushes for equality; the third pushed for the individual woman's rights and started the move to redefine gender; the fourth wave, aka Intersectionalism, says that minority women's concerns were not met with the first three waves, and so started the hyphenation.

Four movements, not one general idea of feminism. Know your enemy.

I proudly support the goals of the first two waves of feminism as correct and just.

raphjd had a shitty experience with a woman and labeled her a feminist. Unless she has a banner she's waving around and is actively working with the movement she's just a woman using (the bad) third and fourth wave feminist ideas that have overshadowed the goal of equality that women have largely already achieved. To say that she speaks for any wave of feminism is to say that a redneck chanting "Jews will not replace us" speaks for the Republican party or Trump. What these people do is a symptom of a disease, not the cause.

csdan goes on to say that the more people know about these small cases the better. I think that's right but remember that third and fourth wave started because people were being treated unfairly by the system. They felt ignored just as rapjhd does and so the system overcorrected. This is why I said you're ironically doing what you're complaining about.

To answer rapjhd, yes, these are still outliers but their movements are growing stronger, conversations are happening, people are thinking about it but we can't think clearly until we calm down, push our feewings to the side. If we don't, then we might as well just knit ourselves some cock and ball hats because we're going to sound is irrational as the pink hats and nothing will get done.

[flozen]

Although I was initially disinclined to post here, I have an observation that spans several threads dealing with gender and social justice.

And it is this:

No point of debate, no personal anecdote, and no attempt at critical thought or persuasion is strengthened by calling a woman a "cunt."

[csrdan]

@cteavin:

Four movements, not one general idea of feminism.

i am aware of this; the criticism is levied against contemporary fourth-wave riding on the merits of it's predecessors. maybe i should have been specific.

@cteavin:

I proudly support the goals of the first two waves of feminism as correct and just.

agreed; but thereafter is the point when the oft quoted "if you support equality you are a feminist" compatibility with plain egalitarianism ends. there are plenty of old die-hard feminists who are ashamed of what the movement has become.

in that way yes, i am sortof guilty of what i complained about in the sense that i was too lazy to disambiguate between nth wave feminists in a discussion that is certainly geared at the 4th wave malaise. however, the difference is the nth wave feminists use the same singular word to refer to themselves while standing for sometimes very different positions. it's very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand the nuanaces and history of the feminist movements. to joe public, a feminist is a feminist and tumblr feminazis are as, if not more representative of their experience of feminism than those who have worked to real positive social changes.

@cteavin:

To say that she speaks for any wave of feminism

i dont think there is an assumption here that she or any "speaks for feminism" in this way unless directly stated or done in the name thereof. she is abusing and betraying the spirit of feminism for her own gain. feminist ideology has led us to a point where legally and socially, this can happen and goes unpunished and unadmonished; almost certainly unintentional in spirit, but inevitable. that is, feminism is to blame for coming to a point where this is possible; regardless of any individual's affiliation, or the intent of the movement as a whole.

tribalism never ends well. be it about gender, race, religion or anything. given an excuse for one group to dehumanise and demonise another and hell will ensue: but once it's started it's extremely difficult to take the high road.

but we can't ignore the fact that the ideology has given those, who want to use it for nothing but petty personal gain sometimes to serious and tragic legal consequences against the spirit of the movement, real legal ammunition and social weight.

also, noone has the right to violence against anyone else. the state has the monopoly on that. the real angering point about this situation is that due to the culture of "taking a woman at her word without question", women can unilaterally invoke state violence against any man of her choosing. if i wrongly (or even rightly, to be fair) locked someone up in my basement for a day i would be criminally charged and sent to jail. And if such a power is to exist for the sake of protecting real victims of rape and domestic violence (and it should), there should be thorough checks and balances for blatant abuse of such a serious power. malicious prosecution IS a crime.
–-

i could make an analogy here about how communism has almost always started with the intent of freeing the oppressed underclass from pseudoslavery and use the resources avaliable to the benefit of the people; and then always ironically become in implementation of the very worst kind of authoritarian dictatorship that indenture and exploit its citizens in a blatant violation of the spirit of the movement in the first place. let's just have a look the shitshow in venezuela right now. Or that mao is by an order of magnitude the greatest butcher and tyrant in history even putting stalin to shame.

i could even say that the spirit of capitalism and free enterprise is slowly being eroded by globalistic corporatism as it is impossible to compete with and is slowly destroying itself and even eroding democracy; while at the same time pointing out that it is a direct product thereof in the same way communism has bred oppressive dictatorships, and feminism that started in the name of equality has bred a class of women who want to abuse their new found "girl power" (read: state power) to oppress men.

and this is why we can't have nice things. all of this, is more than anything: very sad

@flozen:

No point of debate, no personal anecdote, and no attempt at critical thought or persuasion is strengthened by calling a woman a "cunt."

yes, ad hominems do not win arguments, but that was a charged story not an argument and intended to be also an emotional reflection not just a pure academic exercise. i can understand how one might wish to use a term like this in a story with such personal anger and not keep it totally sterile.

wrt. gendered insults in general: they exist. they also all have subtle meanings AND can usually be applied to both genders. a man can be a bitch; but they're usually dicks. men are however, very often cunts; meanwhile women are rarely bastards. maybe this is local language though.

[cteavin]

@csrdan:

@cteavin:

To say that she speaks for any wave of feminism

i dont think there is an assumption here that she or any "speaks for feminism" in this way unless directly stated or done in the name thereof. she is abusing and betraying the spirit of feminism for her own gain. feminist ideology has led us to a point where legally and socially, this can happen and goes unpunished and unadmonished; almost certainly unintentional in spirit, but inevitable. that is, feminism is to blame for coming to a point where this is possible; regardless of any individual's affiliation, or the intent of the movement as a whole.

I don't want to appear pedantic but I want to quibble over something here. Let's speak of a generic woman so not to appear to be making light of a real-life incident. If our Womyn said that she'd been raped twenty or thirty years ago, the burden of proof would have been upon her and she would have been scrutinized. Had she been drinking? What was she wearing? Was she alone? No cuts and bruises? At the end of it, without battery, witnesses, semen samples, and more the authorities wouldn't believe her or wouldn't care. Case dismissed. These are the stories told by countless women which is what brought on the apocalypse third and fourth waves.

When you say that our fictional woman is taking advantage of the spirit of feminism for her own gain, she's taking advantage of an overcorrection in the system and that distinction is important for understanding why allegations of rape and sexual violence are handled they way they are.

The move to believe the victim is the right one.

The system is self-correcting. Historically, women have never held as much power in relation to men: There is no historical precedent. This is the birthing period and the labor pains are a bitch.

On an aside, it's true that most people don't understand what feminism is, just as Americans didn't, and don't, understand what either communism or socialism is. Unless we are clear in our definitions about what we're talking about we hurt ourselves: We are the reason we can't have nice things because we're too lazy to make the effort to think.

[Frederick]

@flozen:

Although I was initially disinclined to post here, I have an observation that spans several threads dealing with gender and social justice.

And it is this:

No point of debate, no personal anecdote, and no attempt at critical thought or persuasion is strengthened by calling a woman a "cunt."

"If the shoe fits, wear it.."
The problem with "strong language" is that it gets misused, then people get their panties in a bunch.
For instance, the word FUCK is used so much for so many things, in so many ways, that it's intended meaning is often lost.
Feminists would like to ban every derogatory word that applies to a female - such as bitch, cunt, dyke, lesbo. 
What words do you use to describe females who are bitches, cunts, etc?

Nobody raises an eyebrow when a man is called a bastard, pig, or son of a bitch.  (true story.. decades ago, my mother once called me a "son of a bitch".. I laughed and replied "you might be right!"

I think you just like to nit pick on irrelevant nonsense to dodge making any credible responses.

[cteavin]

@Frederick:

decades ago, my mother once called me a "son of a bitch".. I laughed and replied "you might be right!"

Total irrelevant aside but back when I was a kid playing in the common area of our very large apartment complex, while our moms were talking one of them offhandedly referred to me as a "son of a bitch". My mom is from Georga, southern pride and all. My mother beat the leaving sh#t out of her, the manager, and was taken away by the police in handcuffs and the woman in an ambulance. Not a scratch on my mom. She was a tough little thing, five foot tall and me, now, grown to six four.

[raphjd]

@flozen:

Although I was initially disinclined to post here, I have an observation that spans several threads dealing with gender and social justice.

And it is this:

No point of debate, no personal anecdote, and no attempt at critical thought or persuasion is strengthened by calling a woman a "cunt."

WOW, you are so far left that you are defending this "woman", who claimed that false rape claims are good for men.    Clearly, it's people like you that are the problem, when it comes to leftist lunacy.

[raphjd]

When we go with the JUST BELIEVE concept, we end up with the shit we have been seeing over the last 20 year of false rape claims blowing up in international media.

YouTube's main "just believe" advocate, Lacy Green, never got into trouble for raping over 4 million people.  We were ignored.  Many of us got threats directly from YouTube over our claims.  They threatened to ban our accounts if we continued the claims against Lacy green.    SJW YouTube protected a mass rapist, despite being publicly supportive of "just believe".

As we saw with "Jackie" at UVA, the entire frat was demonized, their frat house had $25,000 with of damage done to it.    No one from UVA or the press apologized for the lies.  The frat had to pay to fix the damage to their frat house.    The faculty that wrote that horrible letter demanding that the entire frat be expelled from UVA, doubled down once the truth came out.  They wrote another letter demanding that the entire frat be expelled even though they were innocent to show that they support expelling rapists.

In the opening post of this thread, I listed some cases where "just believe" totally failed society.  People's lives were ruined by "just believe".

"Take back the night" girl claimed she was raped and named the supposed rapist.  She only changed her tune when he sued her.  She now claims that she got caught up in the moment and wanted to join in.    She doesn't believe she should be held responsible for falsely claiming he raped her and how that ruined her life.

Mattress Girl had her claims of being raped dismissed by the police and even the college which is extremely anti-male thanks to the Obama administration's "Dear Colleague" letters.  However, she was still allowed to drag it out with her mattress girl routine.

Duke LaCrosse players are still stained by the false rape claims by a hooker/stripper who lied for whatever reason.

The head of the IMF (Strauss-Cohn [sp?]) was brought down and totally ruined by a gold digging bitch.  She was recorded talking to her boyfriend, who was in jail at the time, talking about extorting money from Strauss-Cohn in exchange for dropping the rape claims.    The rape never happened, but it ruined him.

I was also jail immediately, rather than the police waiting to see what the CCTV showed.    Thankfully, I was cleared before the press got ahold of the story.    In the UK, rape claimers are protected from the press, even when they are proven to have lied.  The accused (read; MEN) don't have that protection.  Their name is only released once (but not always) it's decided to prosecute them.    I'm under a lifetime gag order from revealing the name of the woman who the police proved lied about me raping her.    I can get up to 10 years in prison if I do.

++++

Throughout the west, we have criminalized speech.  In most of Europe, it's illegal to cause offense.  Canada has gone a similar way.  US cities and states are too.

Just because no one NYC has been prosecuted under the law, does not remove the fact that they put it into law.

++++

People all over the left have defended "punch a nazi".

If they don't like what you said or might say, they believe they are fully within their right to physically assault you.  Clearly, the opposite does not apply.

The left believes it's ok to attack ANYONE who might be the enemy.  Smugglypuff did this.  After the incident at the college campus,  she attacked a retired couple who were out walking their dog nearby.  Not surprisingly, Smugglypuff has a bit of history before this.  She false flagged her high school with hate graffiti.  She was only prosecuted for attacking the retired couple.  Again, not surprisingly, in court, she was a girl, not the trans boy she usually claims to be.  I guess she wanted to take advantage of the female oppression of lighter sentencing.

The left claims the moral high ground, but have to hide their faces.

++++

An entire political party is based on SJW, BLM, Feminist and other leftist policies.  How is that an "outlier"?  Europe is filled with that crap, how is that "outlier"?

Hillary and her supporters made some of the most hateful claims against the people who didn't support her.  You couldn't support her because of her policies (past and present), it could only be because you are sexist, racist, homophobic, etc, etc, etc, etc etc.  You know, a "deplorable". Madalien Albright famously said that anyone woman who didn't vote for Hillary would burn in hell.

The white woman who ran for Chair of the DNC said she would "shut white people down" if she was elected chair.  Everyone, including those running against her, applauded this.

In the UK, it's illegal to discriminate against people based on race and sex/gender (and some other aspects).  HOWEVER, we have several cases where the Crown Prosecution has no problem as long as the victim(s) is white males (hetero or gay, it doesn't matter).    This was famously made clear by the college "diversity" officer who posted the sign saying something like "all welcome, except white males" with a picture of her next to it pretending to cry.

Sweden brought in Affirmative Action to benefit women where they were under-represented.  A few years ago their supreme court said AA must also benefit men where they are under-represented, so Sweden got rid of AA.

Scandinavian countries stopped recording the race/origin of criminals to keep people from seeing the obvious trend.

In a lot of Europe, it's illegal to disagree with the official narrative of the WW2 holocaust.

As we know, you can deny the Armenian genocide (a jew invented the word based on Armenia) and create a "news" channel based on the group that committed the genocide; The Young Turks.    You can be Armenian and cuck to the Turk who runs the channel and denies the genocide his people committed against your people.

You are in a Catch 22 when it comes to Israel.  You are either an anti-semite or an islamophobe.  Oddly, Semites are not just jews, but the people of that region (jews and muslims), but that's another topic.

++++

Prior to the freaks coming out to cause problems, there wasn't an issue with trans-SEXUALS using the bathroom that matches them.

NO, trans trenders, gender terrorists and the rest of the assclowns had to kick off because they wanted to be special.

Leftists threw real trans people under the bus, to pander to these freaks.

++++

NO.  It's not mainstream.  It's just a few outliers.

Let's ignore that mainstream media, the DNC, social media, western government, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc all enforce this shit.