Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "Secular Talk"
channel.
-
192
-
20
-
17
-
15
-
13
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
8
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
***** Where are you squeamish? I just quoted you trying to distance yourself from the atrocities of the conflict.
When asked if you were proud of bombing Christian Serbs, you responded: "Are you saying I personally bombed people? "
"I'm not really sure how YOU can comment sir, as at the time, you were at home playing super nintendo and masturbating."
As for this silly comment SON, I had already completed my service in the army BY THE TIME you were killing innocent civilians in Kosovo, so I suggest that you be careful with your assumptions.
And I've never been a rapist either, but I can tell you categorically that it is wrong. You seem to be suggesting that you have some special understanding because you were a combatant in Kosovo. How much of the geopolitics did you understand before going in? How many of the tactical decisions were you privy too? I suspect that you no more understood the big picture, than a termite understands everything about the colony simply because it lives there. You were most likely a drone; an expendable weapon, sent to do the work of politicians.
If you saved some lives and met some grateful people, then well done. I was never criticising your role or the war, I was merely pointing out that you cannot claim pride for the collective achievements of the army when it suits you, then want to be viewed as an individual soldier when called on the atrocities committed by that collective when called on those. If you didn't kill innocent Christians in Kosovo it is unlikely that you avoided it out of some principled stance, but merely because you were not called upon personally to do so.
4
-
"Some crazy shit you wouldn't expect to happen in the USA"
Are you fucking kidding?! Have you not been paying attention to a decade of illegal detention and torture in Guantanomo? Torture and murder in Abu Gharaib, drone murder of innocents by the thousand, supporting Mexican drug cartels, extraordinary rendition, NSA rights trampling, police executions, detention without trial, execution of minors and retarded people in Texas, rape of women and kids by prison guards across the country, and government run by business.
It's EXACTLY the kind of thing I'd expect to happen in the USA.
The only morons who still think America is a nice country, is idiot Americans.
The only exceptional thing about America, is how shitty you've become.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** Who on earth is trying to minimise domestic violence?! "Boys will be boys" is absolutely NO justification for violence against women any more than "Any man who let's his female partner beat him up" is a justification for the 40% of domestic violence incidents that are female on male (and it's telling that you completely ignored that statistic).
Who's suggesting that hurting people is acceptable? If that's how you perceive rough-housing then you need to re-examine what it's all about. Quite the opposite. Rough housing teaches males that there are clear boundaries in physical behaviour, and when you transgress those boundaries, there are often immediate unpleasant consequences. True, there IS a category of unpleasant rough-housing, (sack taps, mild torture, pledging, etc) that is all about causing sadistic pain, but this behaviour is often indicative of emotional problems, just as chronic bitchiness is amongst females.
The courts are not simply biased against men because men live up to gender roles. The courts are biased against men because they've been conditioned by some feminists to believe that these gender roles are automatically negative. This is the result of a decades long marketing campaign by feminists, as well as a general societal acceptance of the genders' roles in child-rearing.
The fact is, men are no less capable of responsibility, no less capable of love, than women in child raising. And if men do tend towards certain behaviours, let's start by asking where those stereotypes are enforced from - could it be their primary caregivers - women? Little boys are taught to suppress their emotions, to be strong, and brave and physical, and this is by their mothers. Then the same women have the temerity to complain that they don't like the way that these boys behave when they grow up!
Nobody is suggesting that developing empathy and peacefulness are not laudable goals for society of both genders, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I have spent 20+years of my life learning to fight, and teaching others of both sexes to do so. My goal is to score a victory, not to hurt the other person. What I do is the epitome of male competitiveness and I love it. That does not make my choice an inferior one.
I would never dream of telling a female that she could not become an excellent fighter, nor would I criticise a boy who cried. I am as quick to console a crying male, as to encourage toughness in a female (or vice versa when appropriate). A certain amount of robustness is an essential trait in a human being, but especially males, who face more demanding physical existences.
It is both in a male's nature, and part of the societal expectation of a male to be masculine and physically robust (to at least a minimal extent), yet thanks to feminist skewed law and education, these traits are frowned upon in many quarters - until a woman needs someone to pay for her children, when suddenly the biased duty and responsibility cards are pulled out. I'm certainly not saying that women are gold diggers, but I am saying that they are immediately happy to depend upon, and even exploit traditional gender roles when it comes to raising the children that THEIR biological imperative have urged them to produce.
I agree 100% with your statement that members of the genders do not fall into perfect gender groups, but just the most cursory glance at society will reveal that the vast majority of women in their 30s are mothers, tend to be the primary care giver and provider of emotional support, and probably are in lower paid jobs, if they work at all. By the same token, because they are the primary wage earners, males work longer hours, get to spend less time with their kids, and are seen as the physical strength in the home. As much as you might wish for some kind of androgynous males, whilst females get to retain all of their innate characteristics, biology is against you. We're living in the far swing of the pendulum, where, in an effort to be fair to all, men are losing their rights.
As I believe I said, all I want is a level playing field for both genders, whilst not ignoring the biological differences between us. I want a world where women are treated with respect in the home and the work place, but men are not viewed as monsters because robustness (not violence) is an important part of our psychological make up.
Peace and respect to you.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2