SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - This is so idiotic that it mocks any attempt to describe it

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - This is so idiotic that it mocks any attempt to describe it (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=238341)

It will be interesting to see these multi gender people in about 20 years. I bet they will settle on one gender and it will probably match the factory equipment. They will find it just easier to conform.... just like we had to after we rebelled about what we were rebelling about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus (Post 2565287)

Hm.

I just posted this in the German politics thread, but part of that second article I quoted in there, are relevant here, too, so I quote it a second time and into the context of this thread here:

Quote:

The EU, then, is characterized by three main features: First: The harmonization of the tax- and regulation structure across all member states, so as to reduce economic competition and especially tax-competition between different countries and make all countries equally uncompetitive.

Second: On top of the economic and moral perversity within each country of punishing the productive and subsidizing the unproductive, another layer of international income- and wealth-redistribution is added: of punishing economically better performing countries like Germany and the countries of northern Europe and rewarding economically worse performing countries (mostly of southern Europe) and thus successively rendering the economic performance of all countries equally worse.

And third, of increasing importance especially during the last decade: In order to overcome the rising resistance, in many countries, against the steadily increasing transfer of national sovereignty to Brussels, the EU is on a crusade to erode, and ultimately destroy, all national identities and all social and cultural cohesion. The idea of a nation and of different national and regional identities is ridiculed, and multi-culturalism is hailed instead as an unquestionable “good.” As well, in promoting the award of legal privileges and of “special protection” to everyone, except white, heterosexual men, and especially married family men (who are portrayed as historic ‘oppressors’ owing compensation to everyone else as their historic ‘victims’) – euphemistically called “anti-discrimination” or “affirmative action” policy – the natural social order is systematically undermined. Normality is punished, and abnormity and deviance is rewarded.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/07/...al-perversion/

I again remind of the comparing book by David Engels which I introduced a couple of months ago: "Le Déclin. La crise de l'Union Européenne et le chute de la République Romaine" (dtsch. Auf dem Weg ins Imperium. Die Krise der Europäischen Union und der Untergang der Römischen Republik).

Its a destructive process that is here to last, and that will not stop. Its a destruction that matches patterns and parrallels from history because people refuse to learn lessons from history, and like stupid cattle they time and again follow the same breed of unscrupulous leaders telling them that shiny and glory will rain down on them from heaven, and the herd of cattle allows them to lead them to the slaughtering house once again. What happens today - has happened before already. (One can really start to raise doubts in the truth of evolution theory).

You cannot endlessly fall back to an imagined Reset-button, and assume that "things will become good again by themselves. Nothing happens just from nothing. Maybe in a Biog Bang, but thats the only exception I can think of.

They create the new man, and he is without own identity, and he is socialist instead.

In other words: he is a drone.

Anyway, just to remind of what this thread originally was about in the main:

Quote:

At the university one should learn to think. A decision of the student parliament of Humboldt University shows that one can also unlearn thinking there, says Gunnar Schupelius. The student parliament of the Humboldt University has set a new rule. It is called "hard quoting" and means that every debate ends when only men speak up, but no women.
This rule should ensure gender equality, meaning that men in a meeting do not talk more than women.
The quotation of the list of speakers is an old invention of the Greens, which has prevailed in many areas. What is new is the idea of prohibiting men from speaking out when no woman wants to speak anymore.
Is such a prohibition even allowed? Responsible is the Senate Department for Science, which is led by the Governing Mayor Michael Müller (SPD). They wanted the decision of the student parliament "subject to legal review," said the administration in early June to FDP MP Marcel Luthe, who had asked.
In mid-July, it was then said that the Senate was expecting the President of Humboldt University to declare the decision ineffective. That has not happened yet.
The decision should indeed be invalidated, because it is absurd that men should stop talking if no woman answers.
The decision is further absurd in that it exposes the speakers to which gender they want to be. This is worded as follows: "A female identifying person" should be drawn on the list of speakers in front of the first "male identifying person", unless there is already a "identifying female" person. If there are only three "male identifiers" left on the speech list, the debate will end (...).
The confusion is programmed. If "a female identifying person" is not a woman but a man, she is still considered a woman and is allowed to speak, even though she is not supposed to speak because she is a man.
Universities are there to help you learn to think. You go to university, study there for a few years and come back educated. That is how it is thought. The namesake of the University of Unter den Linden, Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835), spoke of the general education as the highest good.
How can this educational mission be linked to the crazy decision of the student parliament? Not at all! He is an expression of ignorance and delusion. He follows radical ideologies.
Firstly, the feminist demands that are pushed to extremes, and secondly, the so-called "gender theory", according to which every human being is to decide for himself whether he is a man or a woman and according to which there are not only two but many sexes.
At the university one should learn to think. Obviously, you also forget it there.

Source linked in post #1.