It's not like all this is going to benefit most straight white males either. Pretty sure that retirement age is going up for everyone. (Among other problems.)
Fascism begins the moment a ruling class, fearing the people may use their political democracy to gain economic democracy, begins to destroy political democracy in order to retain its power of exploitation and special privilege.
Thomas Clement Douglas PC MP CC SOM MA LL.D (20 October 1904 – 24 February 1986) was a Scottish Canadian politician who served as Premier of Saskatchewan from 1944 to 1961 and Leader of the New Democratic Party from 1961 to 1971.... ...Douglas was voted "The Greatest Canadian" of all time in a nationally televised contest organized by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in 2004.
Honestly, if women, as well as persons of color and the LGBTQIA+ community, having rights and freedoms is such a threat to America - both as a country and a “way of life” - and they cannot coexist, then as an American I would happily say goodbye to America.
What that means, and how that would work, scares the ever loving shit out of me, but no one deserves the shit America does to them.
If you're going to emigrate, you better do it fast. I wouldn't bet that it's still possible without significant effort ("hide for 1000 miles in a lead-lined suitcase in a car trunk"-levels of effort) in a year - locking in their population is a really common thing in dictatorships, and AFAIK confiscated passports (if you had a proper passport in the first place) are already a thing in the US.
Plus, if there's ever a mass emigration wave, many of the more desirable destion countries are definitely going to close the door to you. AFAIK it's already fairly complicated to emigrate from the US to most european countries.
I was thinking more along the lines of the German Democratic Republic or North Korea - Israel at least lets its Jewish population emigrate, but in many dictatorships, absolutely no one is allowed to. Not sure which it's going to be, Apartheit-style or North Korea-style, but if you're not part of the ingroup, the difference probably doesn't matter.
Judging by what I've seen so far, wealthy countries don't care for refugees even if they're well-educated people from the US. On top of that, the US is able to exert pressure on most western countries to not make them recognize the US as unsafe for asylum seekers, even if a destination country wants to do it.
Maybe something like Brazil might be an option, but it's politically volatile - next time it has a rightwing government, all the US refugees might be shipped back to the US. Seems like at this point, all the countries that are consistently willing to oppose the US are either not much better or too volatile to be sure that they won't turn on you.
I feel the same, but also fuck that I was born here and I will not be run off by goddamn nazis. On one hand I’d like to leave, the other hand would like to punch every fascist over and over until THEY fuck off.
[O]n one occasion during 1989, Mr. Trump and I had marital relations in which he behaved very differently toward me than he had during our marriage. As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a "rape", but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.[34]
Oh, America is not alone here. Plenty of places without even that one generation
Honestly, I have to suspect a giant coordinated effort against women and feminine aspect of life spanning damn hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Otherwise I cannot fathom and explanation of how things have gone so ugly for so long
To me, it's unclear what "hard-fought" means here. Are there any rights that aren't hard-fought? Are hard-fought rights different from the other ones?
Every right we have has been fought for. The fights often came at a significant cost, with sacrifice, and required conviction. I remember how "hard-fought" was used, and what it used to mean, so it really makes me wonder how you're using it.
I don't think women's rights (especially the right to work) have been "hard-fought" in any way.
Sure there have been protests and riots of women who demanded these rights, but that did jack shit to change the situation. What really changed the situation was the insight of capitalists that they could get more workers, and thus more productive ability, if women joined the workforce. All it took for that is to influence the media to make these new policies seem preferable, and the people accepted it.
This is, unfortunately, a common libertarian take. The best economic decision says to not discriminate as the more workers you have, the more you produce, thus the free market is what really created these civil rights.
It completely ignores history, but that is a pretty common libertarian take.
The post isn’t wrong, but there’s some nuance to it. With the credit thing, it’s true that women couldn’t reliably get their own credit until 1974. That’s when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act passed, which finally made it illegal for banks to require a husband or male co-signer. Before that, a lot of women could be and were turned away outright, even if they had the income to qualify. So the way it’s phrased is a bit simplified, but the gist is accurate.
The marital rape part is more complicated. Nebraska was actually the first state to outlaw it in 1976, and then other states slowly followed. By 1993, every state had removed the explicit marital exemption from their rape laws. That said, a lot of states still had narrower definitions, weaker penalties, or loopholes, so saying it became “illegal nationwide in 1994” smooths over a messy process. What really happened is that by the early ’90s, no state could outright say “marital rape doesn’t exist” anymore, but enforcement and protections still varied a lot.
So, while the tweet compresses the details, the broader point stands: these changes are incredibly recent. We’re only a generation or two removed from a time when women couldn’t open a line of credit on their own and had virtually no legal protection if their husbands assaulted them.
Homosexuality was removed from the DSM (classification of mental disorders, for which people were institutionalized against their will) also in 1974. Big year for civil rights I guess.
Republican America is just English speaking Russia.
Russia decriminalized spousal abuse in the 2010s and it directley led to a wave of women losing their lives because the police didnt even bother showing up when their partners were beating the brakes off them.
Legally, Russia changed domestic violence from a criminal offense (under Article 116 of the Criminal Code) into an administrative infraction with only fines or short detentions for "first-time, non-serious cases."
and if you can believe it, the champion of this "conservative, traditional values" policy, was a woman.
This is utterly stupid to blame women getting rights as the cause for the inevitable fascist takeover of the US...
I understand she's probably a great person, but using reductive logic even as an unobvious joke is harmful to idiots, and most of the country is idiots.
In fact it's about the US of America, which is an even smaller minority of the world, because it's merely a subset of the Americas, and only a part of Noth America.
Yeah, pointing out that your grandpa probably repeatedly raped grandma and that she didn’t have a choice in marrying him is “making the entire world about women.”
It's an example. You can't list every god damn thing in a meme and if you did, you knucklehead would not read it.
My god, use your brain. You go ahead and make a meme about whatever thing bothers you the most. But no, all you do is complain.
fucktards literally voted in a senile rapist with a history of financial fraud and bankruptcy because the other option was a female. You were literally segregating people just based on color of their skin 50 years ago so thats a low bar. You have states that literally ban life saving abortions. The church influences your government like the 1800s. Political bribes are legal because founding fathers wanted just the rich to run the country. Invades countries without any repercussions for war crimes.
You’re a third world country in a gucci belt.
Much of the development happened because the enormous wealth in the stolen lands and brain drain from countries you sabotage or by hiring literal nazis. The founding fathers knowingly paved ways for redneck nazis with how they created broad legislation to benefit the rich white male, but propaganda and hollywood creates a progressive smokescreen.
Society survives because of all its members, if women just stopped providing then society would collapse. They have been coerced using oppression and force to keep providing despite discrimination, not thanks to it.
How is it undesirable for any reasonable person, man or woman, to have equal rights?
There's actually a fairly compelling argument that women will destroy civilization if they don't have equal rights. They're more likely to produce children if they aren't finding fulfillment in other ways (e.g. having a successful career). More children = more strain on the biosphere (increasing climate change, wars, pandemics, etc.)
Are you just trying to come up with the most asinine insane takes to argue with people? Or do you actually believe this horse shit that youre typing...?
83 Comments
Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world · 146 pts · 324d
I mean yes this is bad, but America is not going to end itself just because women have rights. A lot more to it than that reductive take
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 148 pts · 324d
Right? It's not just women. But also because POC have rights. And gays. And because trans people exist.
someguy3@lemmy.world · 42 pts · 324d
You forgot Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikh(ism?), and [clutches pearls] Atheists!!
SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social · 20 pts · 324d
And those people that... how do you call non millionaires? Ah, scum! Filth!!!
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 5 pts · 323d
We can fix that with a little inflation!
SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social · 4 pts · 323d
Poor people love this simple trick!
primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus · 19 pts · 324d
Yeah. Just one would be something america coukd stand –maybe, for cooler guns and bigger bombs. But all at once?
Serinus@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 324d
It's not like all this is going to benefit most straight white males either. Pretty sure that retirement age is going up for everyone. (Among other problems.)
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 11 pts · 324d
Not the poor ones, no. That's yet another group they want to be rid of.
fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 324d
It's our job to remake America into something unrecognizable, since the status who won't accept us
saltesc@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 324d
Yeah, but second best isnt the best, so fuck everyone else,we're bringing this shit down.
Zombie@feddit.uk · 30 pts · 323d
This is also part of it.
https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas
Global_Liberty@lemmy.ml · 101 pts · 324d
45% of female voters cast their ballot for Trump.
chunes@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 323d
And the majority of white women.
dohpaz42@lemmy.world · 74 pts · 324d
Honestly, if women, as well as persons of color and the LGBTQIA+ community, having rights and freedoms is such a threat to America - both as a country and a “way of life” - and they cannot coexist, then as an American I would happily say goodbye to America.
What that means, and how that would work, scares the ever loving shit out of me, but no one deserves the shit America does to them.rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 35 pts · 324d
If you're going to emigrate, you better do it fast. I wouldn't bet that it's still possible without significant effort ("hide for 1000 miles in a lead-lined suitcase in a car trunk"-levels of effort) in a year - locking in their population is a really common thing in dictatorships, and AFAIK confiscated passports (if you had a proper passport in the first place) are already a thing in the US.
Plus, if there's ever a mass emigration wave, many of the more desirable destion countries are definitely going to close the door to you. AFAIK it's already fairly complicated to emigrate from the US to most european countries.
Mrkawfee@feddit.uk · 13 pts · 323d
Israel literally stops people from emigrating.
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 17 pts · 323d
I was thinking more along the lines of the German Democratic Republic or North Korea - Israel at least lets its Jewish population emigrate, but in many dictatorships, absolutely no one is allowed to. Not sure which it's going to be, Apartheit-style or North Korea-style, but if you're not part of the ingroup, the difference probably doesn't matter.
MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 323d
I remember meeting a guy from East Berlin soon after the Wall fell, he was super excited at getting to travel outside the GDR (we were in Kenya).
Soggy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 323d
Depends on how other countries (particularly Canada) would feel about refugees.
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 2 pts · 323d
Judging by what I've seen so far, wealthy countries don't care for refugees even if they're well-educated people from the US. On top of that, the US is able to exert pressure on most western countries to not make them recognize the US as unsafe for asylum seekers, even if a destination country wants to do it.
Maybe something like Brazil might be an option, but it's politically volatile - next time it has a rightwing government, all the US refugees might be shipped back to the US. Seems like at this point, all the countries that are consistently willing to oppose the US are either not much better or too volatile to be sure that they won't turn on you.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 323d
It's not a threat to America, but to a few elites, christian fundamentalists, and white nationalists. They just convinced others to follow suit.
FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 323d
I feel the same, but also fuck that I was born here and I will not be run off by goddamn nazis. On one hand I’d like to leave, the other hand would like to punch every fascist over and over until THEY fuck off.
miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 47 pts · 324d
Shanmugha@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 323d
Oh, America is not alone here. Plenty of places without even that one generation
Honestly, I have to suspect a giant coordinated effort against women and feminine aspect of life spanning damn hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Otherwise I cannot fathom and explanation of how things have gone so ugly for so long
Quill7513@slrpnk.net · 20 pts · 323d
and that's the patriarchy. if it was the natural order it wouldn't require so much energy to maintain
floop@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 322d
floo@retrolemmy.com · 1 pts · 322d
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 32 pts · 323d
And a couple generations earlier (1920), women finally got the right to vote.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz · 25 pts · 323d
We had to fight for the rights we have and you must fight to keep them.
stinky@redlemmy.com · 4 pts · 323d
Any means necessary
Regdok@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 322d
Wasn't until 1965 all women (of any shade) gained universal suffrage in the USA, with the passing of the Voting Rights Act.
Anyways, this is an interesting list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women's_suffrage
PugJesus@piefed.social · 27 pts · 324d
Hard-fought victories eroded one at a time, and then all at once.
Fuck.
Eyron@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 322d
To me, it's unclear what "hard-fought" means here. Are there any rights that aren't hard-fought? Are hard-fought rights different from the other ones?
Every right we have has been fought for. The fights often came at a significant cost, with sacrifice, and required conviction. I remember how "hard-fought" was used, and what it used to mean, so it really makes me wonder how you're using it.
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de · -3 pts · 323d
I don't think women's rights (especially the right to work) have been "hard-fought" in any way.
Sure there have been protests and riots of women who demanded these rights, but that did jack shit to change the situation. What really changed the situation was the insight of capitalists that they could get more workers, and thus more productive ability, if women joined the workforce. All it took for that is to influence the media to make these new policies seem preferable, and the people accepted it.
PugJesus@piefed.social · 4 pts · 323d
That's an utterly fucking bizarre position considering that women in the workplace far predate women's rights.
Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 323d
This is, unfortunately, a common libertarian take. The best economic decision says to not discriminate as the more workers you have, the more you produce, thus the free market is what really created these civil rights.
It completely ignores history, but that is a pretty common libertarian take.
mechoman444@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 323d
The post isn’t wrong, but there’s some nuance to it. With the credit thing, it’s true that women couldn’t reliably get their own credit until 1974. That’s when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act passed, which finally made it illegal for banks to require a husband or male co-signer. Before that, a lot of women could be and were turned away outright, even if they had the income to qualify. So the way it’s phrased is a bit simplified, but the gist is accurate.
The marital rape part is more complicated. Nebraska was actually the first state to outlaw it in 1976, and then other states slowly followed. By 1993, every state had removed the explicit marital exemption from their rape laws. That said, a lot of states still had narrower definitions, weaker penalties, or loopholes, so saying it became “illegal nationwide in 1994” smooths over a messy process. What really happened is that by the early ’90s, no state could outright say “marital rape doesn’t exist” anymore, but enforcement and protections still varied a lot.
So, while the tweet compresses the details, the broader point stands: these changes are incredibly recent. We’re only a generation or two removed from a time when women couldn’t open a line of credit on their own and had virtually no legal protection if their husbands assaulted them.
redhorsejacket@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 322d
Neat! Another esoteric Nebraska factoid to add to my Rolodex. Thanks for the additional context.
stinky@redlemmy.com · 21 pts · 323d
Gays: yeah, we know.
Homosexuality was removed from the DSM (classification of mental disorders, for which people were institutionalized against their will) also in 1974. Big year for civil rights I guess.
Beebabe@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 324d
This quote was so, so upsetting as a survivor.
Pyro@programming.dev · 14 pts · 324d
Is the title a quote from something?
Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works · 42 pts · 324d
Direct quote from Trump's mouth a few days ago. With regard to crime in DC while he's had the National Guard in.
Come to think of it, Melania was wearing a hat that completely blocked her face from cameras ....
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 323d
Wouldn't surprise me if that was her choice in an attempt to prevent her face from appearing too often in future history textbooks.
LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 324d
Sooooooo depresssssssinggggggg
jsomae@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 323d
51 years is 2 generations.
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 322d
Yep, I'm 50 years old and my mom was in the first generation to have her own credit cards.
DicJacobus@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 322d
Republican America is just English speaking Russia.
Russia decriminalized spousal abuse in the 2010s and it directley led to a wave of women losing their lives because the police didnt even bother showing up when their partners were beating the brakes off them.
Legally, Russia changed domestic violence from a criminal offense (under Article 116 of the Criminal Code) into an administrative infraction with only fines or short detentions for "first-time, non-serious cases."
and if you can believe it, the champion of this "conservative, traditional values" policy, was a woman.
ZeroGravitas@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 323d
Quote aside, Catherynne is a great writer and all around human being. If you like fantasy, look her up.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 323d
I was born 1995. Yikes! I can't believe that.
MotoAsh@piefed.social · 1 pts · 298d
This is utterly stupid to blame women getting rights as the cause for the inevitable fascist takeover of the US...
I understand she's probably a great person, but using reductive logic even as an unobvious joke is harmful to idiots, and most of the country is idiots.
jsomae@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 323d
I think the regime probably seems pretty good to pro-life anti-queer christian white and east-asian women.
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · -9 pts · 323d
minorkeys@lemmy.world · -29 pts · 324d
shawn1122@sh.itjust.works · 16 pts · 324d
Actually the post is about America which is only a small minority of the world.
zergtoshi@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 323d
In fact it's about the US of America, which is an even smaller minority of the world, because it's merely a subset of the Americas, and only a part of Noth America.
andros_rex@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 324d
Yeah, pointing out that your grandpa probably repeatedly raped grandma and that she didn’t have a choice in marrying him is “making the entire world about women.”
minorkeys@lemmy.world · -10 pts · 324d
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org · 5 pts · 323d
It's an example. You can't list every god damn thing in a meme and if you did, you knucklehead would not read it. My god, use your brain. You go ahead and make a meme about whatever thing bothers you the most. But no, all you do is complain.
minorkeys@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 323d
AquaTofana@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 323d
Ew. What a shit take. Your misogyny is showing.
minorkeys@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 323d
How is it misogyny?
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world · -43 pts · 324d
That's absurd. We've backtracked 50 years of one of the more progressive nations with regards to women, not 200. Entirely rage bait without nuance.
Chozo@fedia.io · 32 pts · 324d
Oh yes, we should consider the nuance to wife-beating. Right.
0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 26 pts · 324d
fucktards literally voted in a senile rapist with a history of financial fraud and bankruptcy because the other option was a female. You were literally segregating people just based on color of their skin 50 years ago so thats a low bar. You have states that literally ban life saving abortions. The church influences your government like the 1800s. Political bribes are legal because founding fathers wanted just the rich to run the country. Invades countries without any repercussions for war crimes.
You’re a third world country in a gucci belt.
Much of the development happened because the enormous wealth in the stolen lands and brain drain from countries you sabotage or by hiring literal nazis. The founding fathers knowingly paved ways for redneck nazis with how they created broad legislation to benefit the rich white male, but propaganda and hollywood creates a progressive smokescreen.
Time for some introspection.
apenstaartje@lemmy.cafe · 9 pts · 324d
….. what?! lol
Lazylazycat@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 323d
"We only want to make rape and forced breeding legal again, what's the issue here?".
zergtoshi@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 323d
The only ragebait I can spot is your comment.
No facts, lots of polemics.
Quite well done for a user that want to be called an AI.
Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world · -73 pts · 323d
smiletolerantly@awful.systems · 45 pts · 323d
See kids? This is why you never poke the pencil all the way up your nose.
Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz · 31 pts · 323d
...what?
Society survives because of all its members, if women just stopped providing then society would collapse. They have been coerced using oppression and force to keep providing despite discrimination, not thanks to it.
How is it undesirable for any reasonable person, man or woman, to have equal rights?
ethaver@kbin.earth · 4 pts · 323d
fucking womb envy again
idgi personally I keep trying to donate mine, but some men have a serious complex about it
CognitiveBehavioralDuctTape@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 323d
stinky@redlemmy.com · 1 pts · 323d
Hey so this is actually correct
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · -7 pts · 323d
There's actually a fairly compelling argument that women will destroy civilization if they don't have equal rights. They're more likely to produce children if they aren't finding fulfillment in other ways (e.g. having a successful career). More children = more strain on the biosphere (increasing climate change, wars, pandemics, etc.)
ethaver@kbin.earth · 1 pts · 323d
.
NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 323d
Are you just trying to come up with the most asinine insane takes to argue with people? Or do you actually believe this horse shit that youre typing...?
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 323d
Where's the error in that argument? I didn't come up with it, BTW. Isaac Asimov argues this in an essay in his book The Roving Mind.
I support feminism in any case for other reasons, but I think it's interesting that there's a strong argument for it even if you're a misogynist.
PeacefulForest@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 323d
BlackRoseAmongThorns@slrpnk.net · 7 pts · 323d
Report and move on everyone, this is cheap rage bait.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 323d
Go back to the nazi app, incel!
Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 323d
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 323d
You've made me stupider for having read that, still not as stupid as what you wrote though
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 323d
[citation needed]
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 323d
I miss when you monkeys stayed in your pens on 4chan
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 323d
Lol goddamn you're dumb
SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 323d
Go Play with your Twitter toy, Elon
Aganim@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 323d
As a man I distance myself so far from this post I've now advanced to the stars and beyond.
mechoman444@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 323d
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Omg thanks for the laugh. I can't tell if you're serious or if this is satire but good Lord you cheered me up!
Taleya@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 323d
Hahahahahahahaha good one, dipshit.
stinky@redlemmy.com · 1 pts · 323d
Do you know that gay people exist?
Do you expect gay men to make straight men happy? Do you expect gay women to make straight men happy?
Or, what was your plan for them?
Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 323d
stinky@redlemmy.com · 1 pts · 323d
we have a purpose now lol
SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org · 1 pts · 322d
If they find it "undesirable", they aren't men.