Critical race theory (CRT)

scudsucker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
426
If it means you permanently fuck off to whatever low-level bridge you call home, by all means:

CRT is shit.
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
If it means you permanently fuck off to whatever low-level bridge you call home, by all means:

CRT is shit.
I suppose I shall overlook your proclivity for bad faith statements and take this one at face value.

However, you are only one among many people here who are in need of singing the "Xarog was right and I was wrong" song. ;)
 

scudsucker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
426
I suppose I shall overlook your proclivity for bad faith statements and take this one at face value.
I suggest you consider yourself, Xarog aka GingerBeardMan aka CaptainOblivious, when speaking of "bad faith".

How did that bet go, after all? How was your subsequent banning for sock puppetry, which, I am sure you could agree, is a suitable reward for your own bad faith?
However, you are only one among many people here who are in need of singing the "Xarog was right and I was wrong" song. ;)
You will be waiting for the rest of your miserable lying life for this; not even your mother thought you were "right".
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
I suggest you consider yourself, Xarog aka GingerBeardMan aka CaptainOblivious, when speaking of "bad faith".

How did that bet go, after all? How was your subsequent banning for sock puppetry, which, I am sure you could agree, is a suitable reward for your own bad faith?

You will be waiting for the rest of your miserable lying life for this; not even your mother thought you were "right".
Tu quoque is a logical fallacy, were I to concede that I am untrustworthy, that would by no means improve your own trustworthiness. As such, your gambit is deemed irrelevant.

And you know, on second thought, you tried to hard to get me banned, and it seems you can't do that here, which is probably why you're TRYING to tell me to fuck off.

So how about I just spite you and... don't? :D

I look forward to you telling me all about how even my mother thought I was wrong. Your hatred amuses me to no end, I must confess.

And also, insofar as no account I created on MyBB was made after I received a ban, and no account posted contemporaneously with any other, the accusation of sockpuppetry is demonstrably false. ;)
 

scudsucker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
426
Tu quoque is a logical fallacy, were I to concede that I am untrustworthy, that would by no means improve your own trustworthiness. As such, your gambit is deemed irrelevant.
Word salad, as usual, while you attempt to show... something. Certainly not intelligence.
And you know, on second thought, you tried to hard to get me banned, and it seems you can't do that here, which is probably why you're TRYING to tell me to fuck off.
I did not try to get you banned.

I entered into an open and public bet with you, and I expected you to honestly and honorably uphold your side. I was not on the losing side, somewhat unsurprisingly, but if I had been I would have upheld the conditions.

Coward that you are, you first tried to wriggle out of the bet, and then, when I refused, returned via sock puppets. These were detected, and banned. Sorry about that.
So how about I just spite you and... don't? :D

I look forward to you telling me all about how even my mother thought I was wrong. Your hatred amuses me to no end, I must confess.
Not hatred, contempt and disdain. Mixed with some pity. Don't get your emotions confused here.
And also, insofar as no account I created on MyBB was made after I received a ban,
An admission of sock puppet accounts created before your first ban? That really goes to show your "good faith".
and no account posted contemporaneously with any other, the accusation of sockpuppetry is demonstrably false. ;)
Demonstrably? Then demonstrate it, Xarog/GBM/CaptainOblivious. Demonstrate away.
 
Last edited:

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
Word salad, as usual, while you attempt to show... something. Certainly not intelligence.
It's perfectly coherent, you just have a comprehension problem like most people who repsond to things they don't like with "word salad".

I did not try to get you banned.

I entered into an open and public bet with you, and I expected you to honestly and honorably uphold your side. I was not on the losing side, somewhat unsurprisingly, but if I had been I would have upheld the conditions.

Coward that you are, you first tried to wriggle out of the bet, and then, when I refused, returned via sock puppets. These were detected, and banned. Sorry about that.
Whatever you say, RBP king. And please don't pretend like it's only about me, your hate-boner attends to many. :D

Not hatred, contempt and disdain. Mixed with some pity. Don't get your emotions confused here.
Awww, I get off on it all the same, don't worry. :D


An admission of sock puppet accounts created before your first ban? That really goes to show your "good faith".
By your criteria, Bwana openly engaged in sockpuppetry for most of his forum life prior to becoming a mod. If that's the standard you have to sink to in order to make your stupid accusation stick, well, I can live with someone turning themselves into a clown while attempting to denigrate me. You might have noticed that it's kind of my 'thing'.

Demonstrably? Then demonstrate it, Xarog.
Almost missed this. No, you can demonstrate YOUR accusation of sockpuppetry by showing contemporaneous posts and noting post dates. And nobody is going to bother to demonstrate anything to Mr Reliable Sources who won't even accept someone's own words as a reliable source of what they think. :D

I mean, why bother when all that the response will be is "word salad"? 🤷‍♂️
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
The only thing I was banned for was telling people simping for Greta Thunberg that they were fantasising about the blowjobs she was giving them and was unapologetic about it. And Fucking LOL at how OUTRAGED you all became at the fact that my denouncement for this hatecrime was not UNANIMOUS among non-lefties. The whining lasted for MONTHS! ROFL
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
Ahh, I STILL can't get over it, the so-called "decent" people, saying the most horrible things about entire groups of people with impunity with gay abandon... but dare make the suggestion that they might be attracted to someone who is underage and suddenly you are the pedophile? Sounds familiar, eh @scudsucker? Hahahahahaha, too much.

Of course, the real irony is that it's only a matter of time before captain talking points over there will be proclaiming loudly about the concerns of MAPs and how they've been stigmatised throughout history and their sexual preferences are a sexual preference just like gay or straight. Just like the trans rights issue became a 'thing' for the left the second they got what they wanted regarding gays, so paedophile rights will become the next 'thing' once trans rights is a spent issue and no longer serves as a vehicle for progressive ideological outrage at backward thinkers. Although in his defence he's not among the crowd trying to silence me and frankly in the era of deepfakes our response to what really are biological urges is the same order of magnitude of stupid as the stupidity that is the war on drugs has been as a response to the problem of drug addiction, which is to say a more moderate approach is going to be much more effective at protecting children from molestation in practice and I don't care what the computer generated pixels that people fap to look like so long as they were computer generated.

Oh and btw Scuddy, how many other people did you falsely accuse of being Xarog as part of your banning crusade? :D You know, your commitment to free expression surely does liberalism credit. :sneaky:
 

Paul Hjul

Active Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2020
Messages
355
I take it you arent familiar with Posner's critique of CRT...

Quite unhinged arguments you are trying to take concerning not discriminating against people on thr basis of their being transexual
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
I take it you arent familiar with Posner's critique of CRT...

Quite unhinged arguments you are trying to take concerning not discriminating against people on thr basis of their being transexual
Question: Was it a politically contentious issue whether biological males could compete in the female sports division 10 years ago in the USA? Is it today? Did this contentiousness occur prior or subsequent to the 'final victory' on the issue of gay rights namely that gay marriage was no longer an issue conservatives campaigned against?

And whether or not I am familiar with Posner's critique isn't apropos of anything unless you can establish why. It's certainly not evidence on its own that I am ignorant about CRT with regard to my issue with the framework.
 

Paul Hjul

Active Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2020
Messages
355
question: is the controversy surrounding specific athletes with atypical medical profiles really an actual issue or just something flamed up by dishonest people?

to speak of "biological male" and "biological female" is manifestly a misnomer and usually indicates that somebody doesn't understand biology. Apart from the basic issues around chromosomal conditions which complicate the matter entirely whenever efforts are made at an inflexible division of the human species into only two sexes all manner of problems arise - much of the controversy in athletics boils down to trying to constrain the levels of hormones found in persons deemed biologically female even where such hormones are produced by the persons own body without any medical intervention - the moment you are arguing for hormone and surgical treatments to force somebody to conform to your idea of "biologically male" or "biological female" such as to depart from how they were born your entire logic is missing.

Bigots started campaigning more aggressively on different legs of the slippery slope because that is what they do.

Did racists cunts start persecuting gay men more aggressively in the United States after Loving v Virginia defeated their hopes of keeping race based sexual purity norms alive? Yes of course and legislation that specifically made homosexuality and issue ramped up in the 60s and early 70s turning it clearly into an issue which progressivists (who in the anglophone world had historically been oppositional to effeminacy which was associated with wealthier pro-business conservativism) took the torch on. Are the cunts who spend billions trying to impose a wholly ahistorical conception of marriage onto the law in a quest to ensure their homophobia was part of the next millennia of humanity now getting the panties in a knot over sports ... Ja its pretty much what happens. Dishonest right wing crusaders need to flair up pseudo cultural wars to keep morons pouring money into their corrupt little rackets, so when they are unable to continue with one cultural war they pivot and look for the next distraction.

The irony is that you are actually laying out the evidence in support of Critical Race Theory which comes lack to why a lack of knowing who Posner or why Posner is an intellectual voice against the core premises - the theory - of Critical Race Theory is so damning on your attempt to pretend to have an argument. There is plenty of evidence of a circumstantial or end point nature backing the hypothesis of Critical Race Theory but the fact that the outcomes which a theory predicts only strengthens the theory if there is not another theory which equally well explains and predicts the same outcomes. By pointing you in the direction of somebody who actually knows what they are talking (more often writing) about and who is a fierce critic of Critical Race Theory I am throwing you a bone to enable you to at least strive to be less of a moron.
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
question: is the controversy surrounding specific athletes with atypical medical profiles really an actual issue or just something flamed up by dishonest people?

to speak of "biological male" and "biological female" is manifestly a misnomer and usually indicates that somebody doesn't understand biology. Apart from the basic issues around chromosomal conditions which complicate the matter entirely whenever efforts are made at an inflexible division of the human species into only two sexes all manner of problems arise - much of the controversy in athletics boils down to trying to constrain the levels of hormones found in persons deemed biologically female even where such hormones are produced by the persons own body without any medical intervention - the moment you are arguing for hormone and surgical treatments to force somebody to conform to your idea of "biologically male" or "biological female" such as to depart from how they were born your entire logic is missing.

Bigots started campaigning more aggressively on different legs of the slippery slope because that is what they do.

Did racists cunts start persecuting gay men more aggressively in the United States after Loving v Virginia defeated their hopes of keeping race based sexual purity norms alive? Yes of course and legislation that specifically made homosexuality and issue ramped up in the 60s and early 70s turning it clearly into an issue which progressivists (who in the anglophone world had historically been oppositional to effeminacy which was associated with wealthier pro-business conservativism) took the torch on. Are the cunts who spend billions trying to impose a wholly ahistorical conception of marriage onto the law in a quest to ensure their homophobia was part of the next millennia of humanity now getting the panties in a knot over sports ... Ja its pretty much what happens. Dishonest right wing crusaders need to flair up pseudo cultural wars to keep morons pouring money into their corrupt little rackets, so when they are unable to continue with one cultural war they pivot and look for the next distraction.
Ok, don't care. My history with other members is not germane to the topic of critical race theory, and I don't give enough of a fuck to haggle with you over a throwaway line.

The irony is that you are actually laying out the evidence in support of Critical Race Theory which comes lack to why a lack of knowing who Posner or why Posner is an intellectual voice against the core premises - the theory - of Critical Race Theory is so damning on your attempt to pretend to have an argument. There is plenty of evidence of a circumstantial or end point nature backing the hypothesis of Critical Race Theory but the fact that the outcomes which a theory predicts only strengthens the theory if there is not another theory which equally well explains and predicts the same outcomes. By pointing you in the direction of somebody who actually knows what they are talking (more often writing) about and who is a fierce critic of Critical Race Theory I am throwing you a bone to enable you to at least strive to be less of a moron.
Lol, this is pseudophilosophy, you sophistic and pretentious cunt. You don't specify the details of Posner's criticism, nor do you acknowledge how my criticism is compatible or incompatible with it in any relevant fashion. You did nothing but name-drop and run away, and that's not a fucking argument. Tell me honestly, do you think Arthur would give you the time of day if you tried to pull something as amateurish as this on him?
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
No, actually, @Paul Hjul , you goddamn beauty, you did something much, MUCH better than pseudophilsophy. You, my friend, have made a fucking copy-pasta :D

The irony is that you are actually laying out the evidence in support of [x] which comes lack to why a lack of knowing who [y] or why [y] is an intellectual voice against the core premises - the theory - of [x]is so damning on your attempt to pretend to have an argument. There is plenty of evidence of a circumstantial or end point nature backing the hypothesis of [x] but the fact that the outcomes which a theory predicts only strengthens the theory if there is not another theory which equally well explains and predicts the same outcomes. By pointing you in the direction of somebody who actually knows what they are talking (more often writing) about and who is a fierce critic of [x] I am throwing you a bone to enable you to at least strive to be less of a moron.
Now, should I tell 4chan?
 

EADC

Active Member
Joined
May 3, 2020
Messages
361
The only thing I was banned for was telling people simping for Greta Thunberg that they were fantasising about the blowjobs she was giving them and was unapologetic about it. And Fucking LOL at how OUTRAGED you all became at the fact that my denouncement for this hatecrime was not UNANIMOUS among non-lefties. The whining lasted for MONTHS! ROFL

Uhm didn't you lose a bet that you where meant to leave the forum for good? so all this shows is that you are not a man of your word.
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
Uhm didn't you lose a bet that you where meant to leave the forum for good? so all this shows is that you are not a man of your word.
Nope. I called the bet off months before the due date anyways, as I was entitled to do. Liars like to pretend otherwise.
 

Paul Hjul

Active Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2020
Messages
355
No, actually, @Paul Hjul , you goddamn beauty, you did something much, MUCH better than pseudophilsophy. You, my friend, have made a fucking copy-pasta :D


Now, should I tell 4chan?
Are you alleging plagiarism? If so a link would be necessary. Or are you saying that you've taken my rendition of a fairly common formula of identifying a dishonest fallacy purporting to be an argument.

The formula:
X claims Y against Z because of argument P made by Z but it is clear X doesn't understand P and that claims Y aren't even remotely related to P or Z as can be seen in the argument against P by A, B and C

Goes back to the dialogues and is used in unpacking whether a particular proposition concerns doctrine or cultural and tribal prejudices
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
Are you alleging plagiarism? If so a link would be necessary. Or are you saying that you've taken my rendition of a fairly common formula of identifying a dishonest fallacy purporting to be an argument.
No, that is not what I'm saying.


I am suggesting that you have created memeworthy material.

The formula:
X claims Y against Z because of argument P made by Z but it is clear X doesn't understand P and that claims Y aren't even remotely related to P or Z as can be seen in the argument against P by A, B and C

Goes back to the dialogues and is used in unpacking whether a particular proposition concerns doctrine or cultural and tribal prejudices
Yeah, but you have to demonstrate a familiarity with the subject matter in order for the claim to be credible, and you've yet to do that. And the reason that I suspect that you cannot do this is that you failed to engage substantively with the concrete claims I made about CRT. Saying I'm wrong, but not actually challenging my claims is just going to earn you an eyeroll from me. I've played the "you don't know what you're talking about" game regarding CRT many many times over the years, and when I did discover people who were actually familiar with the subject, I listened to what they had to say very closely indeed because it's actually a great way to learn.
 
Last edited:

scudsucker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
426
Uhm didn't you lose a bet that you where meant to leave the forum for good? so all this shows is that you are not a man of your word.
Nope. I called the bet off months before the due date anyways, as I was entitled to do. Liars like to pretend otherwise.
Called off a bet, as you were "entitled" to do.

You forget, Xarog, that a bet is an agreement between two people. You tried to call off the bet because you sobered up and realized that you were in deep shit. You were not even honest enough to follow the terms: you disappeared shortly before the due date and immediately returned as GingerBeardMan.

If you were in the slightest bit honest, you would have upheld the terms. Hell, if you had admitted you were drunk when you chose to enter a bet with such insane chances of winning, I probably would have agreed to call it off, as is my perogative.

But no, Xarog. You doubled down, and you lost, and then your exceptionally obvious sock puppets returned.

Despite your historical revisionism, your GBM sock got banned for suggesting you, yourself, place your own cock into a 16 year old girl's mouth, with the intention of silencing her. The immediate banning was absolutely correct. Interesting to note though, is that your Xarog account was only banned at that point.

So, in brief: no Xarog, you are a liar and serial sockpuppet user, and, no, nothing you say is trustworthy.

In even shorter form, "fuck off back to Stormfront, you dissembling chunk of solidified whale sputum"
 

TwoPunnyFourWords

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
230
Called off a bet, as you were "entitled" to do.

You forget, Xarog, that a bet is an agreement between two people. You tried to call off the bet because you sobered up and realized that you were in deep shit. You were not even honest enough to follow the terms: you disappeared shortly before the due date and immediately returned as GingerBeardMan.

If you were in the slightest bit honest, you would have upheld the terms. Hell, if you had admitted you were drunk when you chose to enter a bet with such insane chances of winning, I probably would have agreed to call it off, as is my perogative.

But no, Xarog. You doubled down, and you lost, and then your exceptionally obvious sock puppets returned.

Despite your historical revisionism, your GBM sock got banned for suggesting you, yourself, place your own cock into a 16 year old girl's mouth, with the intention of silencing her. The immediate banning was absolutely correct. Interesting to note though, is that your Xarog account was only banned at that point.

So, in brief: no Xarog, you are a liar and serial sockpuppet user, and, no, nothing you say is trustworthy.

In even shorter form, "fuck off back to Stormfront, you dissembling chunk of solidified whale sputum"
Uh, no, I clearly returned as Xarog, your memory is faulty. The historical revisionism is yours. :D

Oh, and it was suggested that if Greta rewarded other people with a blowjob, it would do everyone the favour of shutting her "whore mouth". I did not suggest anywhere that I would put my own dick in her mouth.

So in brief, you are nothing but a fucking liar, as always.

P.S. the Xarog account was banned months after the Greta Thunberg incident, when I wasn't even posting, much to my surprise. Probably crossfire from one of the dozens of people you accused falsely of being a Xarog clone. But I'M the conspiracy theorist, hahahahahaha.
 
Last edited:
Top