PDA

View Full Version : SWEDEN'S largest toy chain "gender neutral"



Rockntractor
11-25-2012, 01:15 AM
SWEDEN'S largest toy chain "gender neutral" after picturing boys holding baby dolls and banishing girls from the dolls pages of its Christmas catalogue.
Digital Pass - $5 weekend papers

"For several years, we have found that the gender debate has grown so strong in the Swedish market that we ... have had to adjust," Jan Nyberg, director of sales at Top Toy, franchise-holder for US toy chain Toys R Us, said.

The country's advertising watchdog reprimanded the company for gender discrimination three years ago following complaints over outdated gender roles in the 2008 Christmas catalogue, which featured boys dressed as superheroes and girls playing princess.

A comparison between this year's Toys R Us catalogues in Sweden and Denmark, where Top Toy is also the franchisee, showed that a boy wielding a toy machine gun in the Danish edition had been replaced by a girl in Sweden.

Elsewhere, a girl was Photoshopped out of the "Hello Kitty" page, a girl holding a baby doll was replaced by a boy, and, in sister chain BR's catalogue, a young girl's pink T-shirt was turned light blue.

Top Toy, Sweden's largest toy retailer by number of stores, said it had received "training and guidance" from the Swedish advertising watchdog, which is a self-regulatory agency.

"We have produced the catalogues for both BR and Toys R Us in a completely different way this year," Nyberg said.
Read More>http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/girls-with-guns-not-dolls-in-gender-neutral-toy-shop/story-e6frf7jo-1226523307879

The world is just going fucking crazy!

Hawkgirl
11-25-2012, 01:48 AM
This will be the next sex change craze. "Make me gender neutral."

RobJohnson
11-25-2012, 02:12 AM
"With the new gender thinking, there is nothing that is right or wrong. It's not a boy or a girl thing, it's a toy for children."

You just need to keep an open mind, Rock. :evil-grin:

NJCardFan
11-25-2012, 02:25 AM
This is born out of the stupidity that women can do the same things as good as men which is total bullshit. With extreme exceptions, the only thing a woman can do better than a man is give birth.

Bailey
11-25-2012, 08:26 AM
This is born out of the stupidity that women can do the same things as good as men which is total bullshit. With extreme exceptions, the only thing a woman can do better than a man is give birth.

Its not even a question of what sex can do things better, men do things differently then women. Men for example using logic for certain problem solving exercises, while women use their emotions.

Wibbins
11-25-2012, 10:57 AM
Its not even a question of what sex can do things better, men do things differently then women. Men for example using logic for certain problem solving exercises, while women use their emotions.

Exactly. The sweds don't believe that the genders have innate differences and that they're all simply a result of society, even with evidence proving other wise the sweds will say "He was looking for something and saw it so his study isn't real, but look at how much pay gap there is against women!" (that last part I added :P)

If you guys want to learn a few things I have been reading about, here's an except from a complementarian conservative.



If you read through liberal commentary on the issue of sex distinctions you find certain recurring themes, all of them flowing logically and predictably from the underlying premises of liberalism:

Since liberals want to be self-determined, and sex distinctions are predetermined, liberals will often describe masculinity and femininity as restrictions on the individual. They use terms like fetter, prison and straitjacket to describe masculinity and femininity.

Liberals assume that we are made human by our capacity to self-determine. Therefore, there are liberals who believe that by dropping the idea of being men or women we finally get to be human beings.

Liberals want to be self-determined, so they particularly resent the predetermined biological fact of being male or female. Liberals are especially resentful of the link between being female and motherhood as this is held to be an unchosen biological destiny. (This is why feminists and liberals think that forcing a woman to carry her baby to term is "oppression", they didn't CHOOSE to get pregnant, they CHOSE to have entertainment, err sex, and since pregnancy isn't self-determined liberals feel they should have the power to determine what happens to their bodies, natural reproductive biology be damned.)

Liberals want to be able to transcend being male or female. Therefore, liberals often describe masculinity and femininity as being artificial social constructs, as this means they are categories that can be deconstructed. Liberals usually reject the idea that masculinity and femininity are natural, or that there are masculine and feminine essences or ideals.

Liberals want to be able to self-define. If there is only a binary choice between being male or female, the opportunity to self-define is limited. Therefore, liberals reject the idea of a binary, in favour of the idea that there are multiple and fluid sex identities.

If the aim is to self-determine, and sex distinctions are predetermined, then abolishing differences between men and women will be thought of as a liberation from outmoded prejudices and injustices. Liberals therefore believe there is a moral purpose in abolishing masculinity and femininity; it is looked on by some as a path to salvation.



How do liberals themselves formulate these themes? Let's begin with Susan Moller Okin, a professor of ethics at Stanford University, who once wrote:

A just future would be one without gender. In its social structures and practices, one's sex would have no more relevance than one's eye color or the length of one's toes. [1]


According to American scholar Carolyn Heilbrun,

our future salvation lies in a movement away from sexual polarization and the prison of gender toward a world in which individual roles and modes of personal behavior can be freely chosen. [2]


Ann Snitow recalls being asked what motivated her political activism:

An academic woman sympathetic to the movement but not active asked what motivated me to spend all this time organizing, marching, meeting.

I tried to explain the excitement I felt at the idea that I didn't have to be a woman ... It was the idea of breaking the law of the category itself that made me delirious. [3]


A professor of journalism, Robert Jensen, warns us that,

We need to get rid of the whole idea of masculinity … Of course, if we are going to jettison masculinity, we have to scrap femininity along with it … For those of us who are biologically male, we have a simple choice: We men can settle for being men, or we can strive to be human beings. [4]


You guys should go read the rest of it, it really shows how ignorant liberals really are when it comes to biology

http://ozconservative.blogspot.com/2010/09/chapter-3-sex-distinctions.html

Odysseus
11-25-2012, 11:32 AM
This will be the next sex change craze. "Make me gender neutral."

They're already eunuchs from the neck up, so why not?

Novaheart
11-25-2012, 12:49 PM
This will be the next sex change craze. "Make me gender neutral."

It's an interesting manifestation of the invasion of Western civilization. Caucasians are the most dimorphic race. While it would take many generations to change that, assuming it could be changed depending upon how hard wired it is, the culture can be changed to emulate a less dimorphic ideal.

It's interesting that Sweden would be where this is happening, since I perceive Swedes to be among the least dimorphic of the Western/Northern European peoples.

It's interesting that in primates, the less dimorphic the population, the more monogamous they tend to be. Think about that when your 5 ft 1 in daughter brings home her 6 ft 2 in fiancé.

Rockntractor
11-25-2012, 12:56 PM
It's an interesting manifestation of the invasion of Western civilization. Caucasians are the most dimorphic race. While it would take many generations to change that, assuming it could be changed depending upon how hard wired it is, the culture can be changed to emulate a less dimorphic ideal.

It's interesting that Sweden would be where this is happening, since I perceive Swedes to be among the least dimorphic of the Western/Northern European peoples.

It's interesting that in primates, the less dimorphic the population, the more monogamous they tend to be. Think about that when your 5 ft 1 in daughter brings home her 6 ft 2 in fiancé.

Homo monkey talk, how cute.

Wibbins
11-25-2012, 09:39 PM
It's an interesting manifestation of the invasion of Western civilization. Caucasians are the most dimorphic race. While it would take many generations to change that, assuming it could be changed depending upon how hard wired it is, the culture can be changed to emulate a less dimorphic ideal.

It's interesting that Sweden would be where this is happening, since I perceive Swedes to be among the least dimorphic of the Western/Northern European peoples.

It's interesting that in primates, the less dimorphic the population, the more monogamous they tend to be. Think about that when your 5 ft 1 in daughter brings home her 6 ft 2 in fiancé.

It's also interesting that a lot of primates fling their poo

NJCardFan
11-25-2012, 11:14 PM
Its not even a question of what sex can do things better, men do things differently then women. Men for example using logic for certain problem solving exercises, while women use their emotions.

You mean like voting?

Odysseus
11-27-2012, 02:05 AM
It's an interesting manifestation of the invasion of Western civilization. Caucasians are the most dimorphic race. While it would take many generations to change that, assuming it could be changed depending upon how hard wired it is, the culture can be changed to emulate a less dimorphic ideal.

It's interesting that Sweden would be where this is happening, since I perceive Swedes to be among the least dimorphic of the Western/Northern European peoples.

It's interesting that in primates, the less dimorphic the population, the more monogamous they tend to be. Think about that when your 5 ft 1 in daughter brings home her 6 ft 2 in fiancé.

While it is certainly possible to create and impose an androgynous ideal on a culture, the real questions that we have to ask are what the implications of such a choice are and whether such a culture can survive. Cultures compete. The confidence that the people of a culture have in their way of life is reflected in how they respond to challenges, both internal and external. Western Europe's response to challenges for that last few generations has been to avoid them. Contrast this with the culture of Britain under Victoria, which emphasized masculine and feminine virtues that were distinctly different from each other, but which were complementary. The traits that we think of as masculine, independence, courage, physical strength, etc., tend to disappear as cultures decline. The late Roman Empire was notoriously effeminate compared to the Roman Republic, for example. The courtiers of eighteenth century Europe were not particularly masculine (Dumas' descriptions of the decline of masculinity in the Musketeers books are particularly interesting in this regard), and most failing cultures become androgynous by undermining male attributes. Even the late imperial Romans didn't think to recruit women into the legions, nor did the court of Louis XVI seek to create female musketeers. Ours appears to be the first that has managed to feminize males while making women more masculine. The virtues that we think of as feminine, beauty, grace and nurturing, are also in decline. Our culture parodies femininity, to the point where drag queens compete in beauty contests and celebrities compete to shock us with sexual escapades that would have made Messalina blush.

The Swedes have chosen to enforce androgyny, as they have chosen to decline in their capacity to act as a nation and a people. It's simply another aspect of their decline.

Novaheart
11-27-2012, 03:23 AM
While it is certainly possible to create and impose an androgynous ideal on a culture, the real questions that we have to ask are what the implications of such a choice are and whether such a culture can survive. Cultures compete. The confidence that the people of a culture have in their way of life is reflected in how they respond to challenges, both internal and external. Western Europe's response to challenges for that last few generations has been to avoid them. Contrast this with the culture of Britain under Victoria, which emphasized masculine and feminine virtues that were distinctly different from each other, but which were complementary. The traits that we think of as masculine, independence, courage, physical strength, etc., tend to disappear as cultures decline. The late Roman Empire was notoriously effeminate compared to the Roman Republic, for example. The courtiers of eighteenth century Europe were not particularly masculine (Dumas' descriptions of the decline of masculinity in the Musketeers books are particularly interesting in this regard), and most failing cultures become androgynous by undermining male attributes. Even the late imperial Romans didn't think to recruit women into the legions, nor did the court of Louis XVI seek to create female musketeers. Ours appears to be the first that has managed to feminize males while making women more masculine. The virtues that we think of as feminine, beauty, grace and nurturing, are also in decline. Our culture parodies femininity, to the point where drag queens compete in beauty contests and celebrities compete to shock us with sexual escapades that would have made Messalina blush.

The Swedes have chosen to enforce androgyny, as they have chosen to decline in their capacity to act as a nation and a people. It's simply another aspect of their decline.

We tried to have swishy male leads in the US. I won't list the ones I consider swishy so as to not start a sideline battle here. But for as long as we have had chick flicks we have had male leads that women think are swell and men find uninspiring. The response was to glorify blue collar masculinity. Then came hippies and an openly androgynous effort in the middle and upper class, to which the lower classes pushed back. The feminization of male behavior gradually took hold in well behaved and academically inclined males who were taught by women. Meanwhile, the lower class starts emulating a street and prison standard of masculinity marked by tattoos, ghetto language, and prison clothing. Still, young females adore sexless and sexually nonthreatening males like Justin Bieber and harmonious boy bands. Young men respond to this by running in packs and declaring their lack of interest in respectable, clingy or demanding females.

noonwitch
11-27-2012, 09:52 AM
Legos are made in Denmark, right? Not Sweden? I always thought that they were the best gender neutral toy, in a good way. Boys and girls both like them, they can play with them together at family gatherings and all.


I was a girly-girl as a kid, and played with dolls-baby dolls, pretty dolls, Barbies, Dawn dolls. The only boy I knew then who played with dolls is gay, now. Just saying.

Not counting GI Joe, which isn't really a doll. My uncle who is 7 years older than me had a collection of GI Joes (60s models) and all the assorted equipment-stuff that the Toy Hunter would love. His GI Joes would take my Barbies for rides in Joe's jeep, but that's mainly because he has always been a very good uncle.

Wibbins
11-27-2012, 11:04 AM
Legos are made in Denmark, right? Not Sweden? I always thought that they were the best gender neutral toy, in a good way. Boys and girls both like them, they can play with them together at family gatherings and all.


I was a girly-girl as a kid, and played with dolls-baby dolls, pretty dolls, Barbies, Dawn dolls. The only boy I knew then who played with dolls is gay, now. Just saying.

Not counting GI Joe, which isn't really a doll. My uncle who is 7 years older than me had a collection of GI Joes (60s models) and all the assorted equipment-stuff that the Toy Hunter would love. His GI Joes would take my Barbies for rides in Joe's jeep, but that's mainly because he has always been a very good uncle.

I have one of those brown baby doll thingies that would close its eyes when laid on its back, I'm straight as can be. I was very protective over the baby doll so I guess you could say it was very masculine to protect the innocent. Oh, and I also read The babysitter club, not sure why, I do know that I've always been a romantic kind of guy, it's why I was worried I'd never find a girl that believed in complementarianism. Hell, just last friday this song[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HJiL6OerCI[/URL]
played and I jumped up and pulled my fiancee off the computer from doing homework and danced in her room with her :love_heart:

m00
11-27-2012, 11:37 AM
I don't know if the US is in a position to criticize Sweden on the direction of their culture. Just sayin' :friendly_wink:

noonwitch
11-27-2012, 11:58 AM
I have one of those brown baby doll thingies that would close its eyes when laid on its back, I'm straight as can be. I was very protective over the baby doll so I guess you could say it was very masculine to protect the innocent. Oh, and I also read The babysitter club, not sure why, I do know that I've always been a romantic kind of guy, it's why I was worried I'd never find a girl that believed in complementarianism. Hell, just last friday this song[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HJiL6OerCI[/URL]
played and I jumped up and pulled my fiancee off the computer from doing homework and danced in her room with her :love_heart:




I was just commenting on the one guy I knew who played with dolls. Where I grew up, we had a pretty serious code about that kind of thing, at least as it applied to boys playing with girls' toys. It didn't necessarily apply to tomboys like my sister, who played sports, didn't like dolls and beat up boys who pissed her off. The boys she beat up were considered sissies for a while afterward. They usually had to regain their masculinity in Little League.

Hawkgirl
11-27-2012, 12:11 PM
beat up boys who pissed her off. The boys she beat up were considered sissies for a while afterward. They usually had to regain their masculinity in Little League.

I was a bit tomboyish growing up, but I did have my barbies as well. I just enjoyed boys company more because I liked to do what they did, with games like wiffleball and manhunt. My father made sure I grew out of that stage after puberty as he didn't want me around any boys after that. I was also a bit bossy and the boys kept me in my place and I liked that.:biggrin-new:

Bailey
11-27-2012, 12:18 PM
You mean like voting?

Isn't a proven fact that ever since women got the right to vote the debt in this country has risen?

Hawkgirl
11-27-2012, 12:50 PM
Isn't a proven fact that ever since women got the right to vote the debt in this country has risen?

Women are very underrepresented in Congress and the Senate, so it's all on you guys.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 12:51 PM
I don't know if the US is in a position to criticize Sweden on the direction of their culture. Just sayin' :friendly_wink:

Liberalism element in US is same poison in both countries. Liberalism and socialism decay societies.

Novaheart
11-27-2012, 12:56 PM
I had a boy doll, but I forgot about him somewhere along the way. I remember one day, when I was about five, noticing that he was missing, and I went looking for him. Or I could have dreamt the entire episode, my dreams are like that. In any event, I also had a GI Joe and rockem sockem robots.

Now I know the idiot gallery will have to chime in on this, but there was a problem with GI Joe. He wasn't anatomically correct. For all intents and purposes, Barbie had lady parts. At least, she had breasts and for all I knew looked to be in order. Joe was decidedly imperfect in this regard.

Novaheart
11-27-2012, 12:58 PM
Liberalism element in US is same poison in both countries. Liberalism and socialism decay societies.

That is a statement made absurd by its generality. There are plenty of liberal ideas and social changes from which you have benefited and of which you undoubtedly approve.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 12:59 PM
I don't know if the US is in a position to criticize Sweden on the direction of their culture. Just sayin' :friendly_wink:

You are one of the biggest gay apologists here, yet when a news story reports Sweden forcing a gender neutrality agenda our news shouldn't even report it because our society is following right behind.
Is forcing a society to be effeminate bad or not. You spend too much time flossing your ass with the fence.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 01:01 PM
That is a statement made absurd by its generality. There are plenty of liberal ideas and social changes from which you have benefited and of which you undoubtedly approve.

Liberalism is a cancer, you are a glob of cancerous cells.

Wibbins
11-27-2012, 01:05 PM
Women are very underrepresented in Congress and the Senate, so it's all on you guys.

But a majority of women vote compared to men, so women are the ones voting in men that like to spend money... on women i.e alimony, and entitlement programs -because independent women don't need no man, only the gubmint, majority men, to give them money taken from men/fathers that the women kicked out of the home(70% of divorces are initiated by women using no-fault reason aka they're not HAAAPPPYYYY) rawr-

Novaheart
11-27-2012, 01:09 PM
You are one of the biggest gay apologists here, yet when a news story reports Sweden forcing a gender neutrality agenda our news shouldn't even report it because our society is following right behind.
Is forcing a society to be effeminate bad or not. You spend too much time flossing your ass with the fence.

gay ≠ gender neutral

Gender studies is a separate zone of academic bullshit than Queer Theory. In fact, arguing about those two things is what gives meaning for life to the two camps. The Gender folks like to claim that the Queers are just gender expression and in denial, and the Queers think that the Gender folks are self hating people who have adapted to a gay hostile world.

Elspeth
11-27-2012, 01:33 PM
Women are very underrepresented in Congress and the Senate, so it's all on you guys.

It's always the guy that buys the expensive items when he splurges. A woman goes out and splurges on a $100 pair of shoes. A guy goes out and splurges on a $35,000 truck.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 02:18 PM
Liberalism is a cancer, you are a glob of cancerous cells.

That's kind of harsh. Liberalism is no more a bad thing than Conservativism. It is how people interpret these concepts that creates the problem. Now in regards to this toy company. It is indeed quite interesting but at the same time isn't really causing me any harm. It is a stupid over-corrective decision in a very PC Sweden, but let it stay in Sweden. It isn't affecting us outside of pissing some people off and making some people happy.

m00
11-27-2012, 03:25 PM
You are one of the biggest gay apologists here, yet when a news story reports Sweden forcing a gender neutrality agenda our news shouldn't even report it because our society is following right behind.
Is forcing a society to be effeminate bad or not. You spend too much time flossing your ass with the fence.

No, I'm just saying I don't understand why people get all morally offended by what a Swedish Toy company does in Sweden. I think there's enough to be morally offended by in the US.

Out of all the European countries whose cultures are literally rotting out from underneath them, the Scandinavian countries seem to be doing okay. Their PC gets a little silly, but I don't see why we'd get outraged... it works for them.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 03:46 PM
That's kind of harsh. Liberalism is no more a bad thing than Conservativism. It is how people interpret these concepts that creates the problem. Now in regards to this toy company. It is indeed quite interesting but at the same time isn't really causing me any harm. It is a stupid over-corrective decision in a very PC Sweden, but let it stay in Sweden. It isn't affecting us outside of pissing some people off and making some people happy.

The idea that compassion , charity, art etc.... belong to liberalism is bullshit, they exist and have existed in conservatism for a long time but lack the shallowness and lack of sustainability that has developed in liberalism.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 05:47 PM
The idea that compassion , charity, art etc.... belong to liberalism is bullshit, they exist and have existed in conservatism for a long time but lack the shallowness and lack of sustainability that has developed in liberalism.

The idea that only Conservatives are charitable and compassionate is also bullshit. I never said anyone aspect belonged to a certain group. Charity is charity and compassion is compassion. Regardless of which side of the aisle you sit.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 06:01 PM
The idea that only Conservatives are charitable and compassionate is also bullshit. I never said anyone aspect belonged to a certain group. Charity is charity and compassion is compassion. Regardless of which side of the aisle you sit.

http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Bailey
11-27-2012, 06:23 PM
The idea that only Conservatives are charitable and compassionate is also bullshit. I never said anyone aspect belonged to a certain group. Charity is charity and compassion is compassion. Regardless of which side of the aisle you sit.

Conservatives give more of their own money while liberals think being charitable consists of giving tax money to lazy people.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 06:23 PM
http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

This proves that Republicans give more. It doesn't prove that Democrats don't give at all.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 06:30 PM
This proves that Republicans give more. It doesn't prove that Democrats don't give at all.

No where did I say they give nothing, are you that fucking dense? What that showed was almost triple giving by conservatives.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 06:34 PM
Conservatives give more of their own money while liberals think being charitable consists of giving tax money to lazy people.

There is nothing generous about giving away other peoples money, I'm getting tired of these socialists here that claim they are libertarian and conservative, they are frauds.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 06:39 PM
There is nothing generous about giving away other peoples money, I'm getting tired of these socialists here that claim they are libertarian and conservative, they are frauds.

So you're argument is being charitable is owned by Conservatives because they give more? Because that is how I am reading it. If I am mistaken please feel free to elaborate.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 06:44 PM
So you're argument is being charitable is owned by Conservatives because they give more? Because that is how I am reading it. If I am mistaken please feel free to elaborate.

I said what I meant in my posts, put the bong down and read them.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 06:47 PM
I said what I meant in my posts, put the bong down and read them.

What I read is that because Conservatives give more, they own the concept. Which I argue.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 06:58 PM
What I read is that because Conservatives give more, they own the concept. Which I argue.

You know exactly what I said or you wouldn't be twisting it to try and make it mean something else, one of the other reasons I can't stand liberals.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 07:05 PM
You know exactly what I said or you wouldn't be twisting it to try and make it mean something else, one of the other reasons I can't stand liberals.

Yay this argument again. I don't like Liberals either. I never said anything belonged to either party. On the contrary I said they belonged to no specific group.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 07:12 PM
Yay this argument again. I don't like Liberals either. I never said anything belonged to either party. On the contrary I said they belonged to no specific group.

How about the facts libtard, the statistics showed almost three times as much from conservatives, visualize me holding up my middle finger, that is how much liberals give. Now visualize me holding up three fingers, that is how much conservative give.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 07:14 PM
How about the facts libtard, the statistics showed almost three times as much from conservatives, visualize me holding up my middle finger, that is how much liberals give. Now visualize me holding up three fingers, that is how much conservative give.

1. I am not a Liberal

2. As I just said, giving more does not make it your idea to own. It just means you give more. That's all. And good for you for doing so.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 07:18 PM
1. I am not a Liberal

2. As I just said, giving more does not make it your idea to own. It just means you give more. That's all. And good for you for doing so.

Your posts speak for themselves, most of your time here is spent arguing for liberal causes.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 07:22 PM
Your posts speak for themselves, most of your time here is spent arguing for liberal causes.

Yes all those Liberal causes like same sex marriage and........ I think that's it. I like low taxes and as little war and spending as possible. I guess not hating every Muslim counts as being Liberal, too. And I got really pissed about the Stimulus Package and ObamaCare. Yeah, I am definitely a Liberal.

Rock, I am disagreeing with you about this on the concept that no one "owns" charity. I guess that also makes me a Liberal.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 07:29 PM
Yes all those Liberal causes like same sex marriage and........ I think that's it. I like low taxes and as little war and spending as possible. I guess not hating every Muslim counts as being Liberal, too. And I got really pissed about the Stimulus Package and ObamaCare. Yeah, I am definitely a Liberal.

Rock, I am disagreeing with you about this on the concept that no one "owns" charity. I guess that also makes me a Liberal.

I never said they own charity, that was the straw man you built. I think the words I used without looking back was that the giving of the liberals was shallow and i would say that the stats I provided proved that.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 07:31 PM
The only thing liberals have to offer conservatives is an example of what we should not do.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 07:37 PM
The idea that compassion , charity, art etc.... belong to liberalism is bullshit, they exist and have existed in conservatism for a long time but lack the shallowness and lack of sustainability that has developed in liberalism.

I assume you mean shallow as a whole? And not necessarily that every Liberal is shallow in their charity? And when you say that they don't belong to Liberalism, you insinuate they belong, or are owned, by Conservatives. I won't argue that Conservatives donate more, I have seen the numbers. I don't care that Conservatives donate more and I wouldn't care if it were the Liberals who donated more.

Hawkgirl
11-27-2012, 07:50 PM
Charity is charity and compassion is compassion.

And facts are facts. It's a known fact liberals are stingy bastids who want to spend YOUR money but not theirs.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 07:57 PM
I assume you mean shallow as a whole? And not necessarily that every Liberal is shallow in their charity? And when you say that they don't belong to Liberalism, you insinuate they belong, or are owned, by Conservatives. I won't argue that Conservatives donate more, I have seen the numbers. I don't care that Conservatives donate more and I wouldn't care if it were the Liberals who donated more.

There is nothing true of everyone in every group, it is really irritating to have to explain something that simple to you, this may be a little more than you can handle here , I know I don't have the time or the Patience to explain everything in perfect detail.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 07:59 PM
There is nothing true of everyone in every group, it is really irritating to have to explain something that simple to you, this may be a little more than you can handle here , I know I don't have the time or the Patience to explain everything in perfect detail.

Don't paint with such a broad brush.

Hawkgirl
11-27-2012, 07:59 PM
There is nothing true of everyone in every group, it is really irritating to have to explain something that simple to you, this may be a little more than you can handle here , I know I don't have the time or the Patience to explain everything in perfect detail.

He's playing a game of GOTCHA!!! YOU'RE A RACIST AND A *)^&%^&**()_*&^$@#@.

GenY, try debating like a grown up.

Rockntractor
11-27-2012, 08:01 PM
And facts are facts. It's a known fact liberals are stingy bastids who want to spend YOUR money but not theirs.

It's no use Hawk, the density level here is high.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 08:22 PM
He's playing a game of GOTCHA!!! YOU'RE A RACIST AND A *)^&%^&**()_*&^$@#@.

GenY, try debating like a grown up.

I have no reason to think he is a racist. And could you not say, Hawk, that Conservatives also want to spend our money just in different ways? Such as going to every country we don't like and killing people who cannot harm us.

Hawkgirl
11-27-2012, 09:55 PM
killing people who cannot harm us.
Enough with the bullshit. We are not targeting innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq. Are you mad that we disrupted (killed) Al Qaeda operatives and their training camps in Afghanistan? Should we stand idly by while they train for and plan their next attack on us?

Generation Why?
11-28-2012, 12:52 PM
Enough with the bullshit. We are not targeting innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq. Are you mad that we disrupted (killed) Al Qaeda operatives and their training camps in Afghanistan? Should we stand idly by while they train for and plan their next attack on us?

I am very happy that we went to Afghanistan. Then for some reason we went to Iraq and took our eye off the ball.