AcidSmiley

least obvious volvel police honeypot

Solidarity with Palestine and bisexuals, Cuba doesn't miss.

Up top

Bow down

Rock it to the side when you tip that crown

Fedora real tight, slow down

Pinky up, I ain't never comin' down, no

I now crave the sweet oblivion of death

Can't find Israel on a map? Destiny can't even find his own ass in his pants and if he could, he'd spent the rest of the day debating every single fart that comes out of it.

The article makes the argument that she is not the male beauty standard for women, but the female one.

That's kinda wild tbh. Which female beauty standard is that supposed to refer to? What straight women buying into hegemonial femininity want to be like? What queer women find hot? These two standards tend to be not the same type of woman, and the latter in particular usually isn't one narrowly defined type of woman in the first place, because the entire point of a sapphic desire that defines itself in opposition to the hegemonnial way of sexualizing women is to view each other as subjects, not as objects, which only works when you understand our beauty as an expression of ourself, not as a fulfillment of an abstract and policed ideal beauty standard that by definition must always exclude most women because most women are not of the same race, body shape etc.

Which, btw, is a position that i've not only seen in all kinds of lesbian communities, but found a ton of straight dudes to very enthusiastically agree on, because viewing women as human and being able to find more than 1% of the female population hot are both kind of a prerequisite if you realistically want a fulfilling relationship with a woman, which surprisingly tends to be something most straight men actually want.

Or, tl;dr: Reactionary anti-feminists who enforce hegemonial gender roles fight to make everyone unhappy, including other cishet dudes.

East Prussians were expulsed because their country had just started WW2, committed the literal Holocaust and then rightfully got its shit kicked in. And this isn't event the first time i see an Atlantic council ghoul compare the displacement of Palestinians to that of people from the former easternmost parts of Germany (parts which were, btw, stolen from Polish and Baltic people in a settler colonialist expansion move to begin with). This is just another round of comparing Palestinians and the literal OG nazis, and once more it boils down to "well the literal fucking NSDAP was not as bad as these people whose hospitals have just been bombed to shit".

Either that or the job makes them virulently racist, most likely a bit of both.

You continue to argue in bad faith like the cahuvinist redditor turd gourmet you are, quoting the one paragraph ITT where you werne't completely full of shit and pretending you didn't type out the entire rest of your replies.

Yes, and after that you have spent several posts arguing why we should do the exact opposite and value the misleading idea that cracker is in some way comparable to the nword, you disingenuous debatebro weasel.

Ah, more of the liberalism. You know there's structural racism, you know it is fundamentally different from this "prejudice based on skin color" nonsense, you know that people are not aware enough of that ignorance and like a liberal counterrevolutionary, you argue in favor of keeping them ignorant on this. Why? How fragile do you have to be to get insulted over the term cracker? I'm white myself, i've never felt the slightest bit insulted by the word. And unlike your privileged ass, i know what actual oppression is, what it means to be targeted by actual slurs. Your position is laughable and reactionary.

All actual racism is structural. If you argue that a group that experiences no disadvantage based on their skin color can be insulted in a racist way, you're already lending legitimacy to the myth of "anti-white racism" being a thing, or at the very least remain stuck in a liberal misunderstanding of racism as an individual's character flaw that leads to them acting in an uncivil way, not a part of a society-spanning system of exerting power and creating permanent underclasses along racialized lines. Any and all debate around the word cracker is always a debate about the first part of your post, and if it doesn't arrive there, that's a failure to frame the debate correctly and steer it towards highlighting how racism actually works.