my subscriptions
POPULAR-ALL-RANDOM | LOADING...MORE »
rutars commented on a post in r/sweden
1.7k
aliquise -1 points

Xenofobi = rädsla för främlingar.

I just Libanons fall verkar det ha varit ett tillskott av Palestinier. I Sverige fall just nu ett tillskott av afrikaner och människor ifrån mellanöstern. Människor av en annan kultur som kommer hit och tar sin kultur med sig och gör Sverige mer mångkulturellt och ökar spänningarna i samhället, sänker tilltron och viljan att delta med resten av samhället och ökar risken för alla slags konflikter inkl. de som brukar våld.
"Mångkultur" och Xenofobi är ju i princip direkta motsatser. Mångkultur utfallet av att ta emot främlingar och främligtfientlighet att inte vilja göra det / bevara den rådande kulturen.
Vad gäller kebabpizza så kan du äta kebabpizza även i ett Sverige med 100% svenskar.
Det har ju i princip noll koppling till varandra men det är ju enkelt att fråga dig hur mycket eritreanskn somalisk eller syrisk mat du äter med tanke på att så många har kommit nu liksom hur kopplat sushis popularitet är till antalet japaner i Sverige. Och bara för att du äter kebabpizza kanske saker som högre skatt, tafsade i bubbelbadet, gruppvåldtäkter, mord och terrordåd är något som du ändå tycker är rätt ok.
Vad gäller Romarriket så är det ju lika genomtänkt som allt annat från 68-i-intelligenskvot-vänstern har att komma med. Romarriket föll ju som bekant sönder. Precis som alla andra imperier. EU är ju inte särskilt gammalt och inte alltför stabilt det heller. Mångkultur och att tvingas ihop med andra är ju dåligt vilket ju har visats mest hela tiden. Romarriket finns ju inte kvar. Ta dig en funderar på varför så är fallet. Fritt fram att fundera på varför EU kan braka samman med. Eller varför jag inte vill vara en del av det svenska samhället.
Det är synd att man skall behöva slösa så mycket tid på alla lågbegåvade som ändå inte lyssnar och lär sig något. Någon måste ju säga något men det är ju så jävla meningslöst. Bättre om ni inte fanns.

rutars 3 points

Jag vet inte varför du tror att jag är intresserad av att hålla en debatt med någon som tar en skämttråd om bokstaven x och dess sällsynta användande som tillfälle att skriva flertalet paragrafer om varför xenofobi är rättfärdigat, ifrågasätter min intelligens och avslutar med "Bättre om ni inte fanns."

Det är synd att man skall behöva slösa så mycket tid på alla lågbegåvade som ändå inte lyssnar och lär sig något.

Precis. ibland är det bättre att tacka för sig och låta idiotin tala för sig själv. Ha en fortsatt trevlig kväll.

aliquise -1 points

Du frågar ju dumma frågor.

Det finns en direkt koppling emellan xenofobi och mångkultur.
Ställ inte dumma frågor så slipper du få svar. Det är inte särskilt komplicerat. Men som sagt jag vet hur ni har det.

rutars 3 points

Jag fick mitt svar så nu är jag helt nöjd. Du anser att mångkultur är motsatsen till xenofobi, så när någon skämtar om Ripleys "xenofobi" mot xenomorfer i ett ganska roligt skämt så tar du tillfället i akt att prata om motsatsen.

Load more comments
rutars commented on a post in r/news
Lofoten_ 59 points

Strawman? A woman running for office in Michigan literally said "Vote for me because I don't have a penis, I can't rape you."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dana-nessel-campaign-ad_us_5a1f1116e4b0d52b8dc25af9

“If the last few weeks have taught us anything, it’s that we need more women in positions of power, not less,” she says in the ad. “So when you’re choosing Michigan’s next attorney general, ask yourself this: Who can you trust most not to show you their penis in a professional setting? Is it the candidate who doesn’t have a penis? I’d say so.”

The implication is clearly that only men can sexually assault or sexually harass.

rutars 6 points

That's obviously wrong, but you've moved the goalpost now. "All men are rapists" =/= "all rapists are men" even though both statements are false.

rutars commented on a post in r/pics
Thelastofthree 0 points

Skokie is a town that had a large Nazi Parade that was defended in the courts by the ACLU, and you kind of just undermined your argument. You only know about Charlottesville because people have been shoehorning the Nazi issue on to the town. The town is not known for Nazis or Nazi marches, just like Skokie isn't known for Nazi marches.

If you want to have an opinion on something, you should be informed. I don't know shit about your dumb fucking town, so I'm not gonna comment on it. Maybe you should do the same?

rutars 0 points

Skokie is a town that had a large Nazi Parade that was defended in the courts by the ACLU, and you kind of just undermined your argument.

And the Skokie rally happened in the 70's, decades before I was born. What exactly is being undermined here? Because I don't know about all Nazi rallies in the US for the past couple of decades that means that a recent Nazi rally isn't what put Charlottesville on the map internationally? That makes absolutely no sense.

You only know about Charlottesville because people have been shoehorning the Nazi issue on to the town. The town is not known for Nazis or Nazi marches, just like Skokie isn't known for Nazi marches.

Yes, and that is literally the only thing I know about Charlottesville, shoehorn or no. It's similar to most people who weren't familiar with the place before the rally. But as the rally made international news, most people who know of the place now associate it with the rally last year.

If you want to have an opinion on something, you should be informed. I don't know shit about your dumb fucking town, so I'm not gonna comment on it. Maybe you should do the same?

Is this personal to you or something? We are obviously not getting anywhere here. Google around a bit, search on YouTube, look through some hashtags and you will see that most online discourse about Charlottesville is about the rally, not the university. I don't know of any accurate way to prove my point further. I'm not about to conduct a world-wide survey for you.

Thelastofthree -1 points

Skokie being in the 70's is besides the point. Either Skokie and Charlottesville are know for Nazi marches, or theyre not. The age/birthdays of a person wouldn't change that. People born after 9/11 still know New York as the place where the towers went down. Is it the same as someone who watched it live on TV? No, but the knowledge is there.

The fact that you don't know about the Skokie Illinois March points to most likely Charlottesville not being known as a town for Nazi marches. Just because the media keeps harping on about this being a town for Nazi marches, doesn't make it so.

Also, the US really doesn't have many Nazi rallies, there's a reason this one is being built up as big as it is. There's a major difference between the supply and demand of racists in America, hence why a lot of recent "hate crimes" turned out to be hoaxes. There's so few nazis around, that liberals have to FAKE Nazi stunts to get the "dialogue" going.

rutars 0 points

Skokie being in the 70's is besides the point. Either Skokie and Charlottesville are know for Nazi marches, or theyre not. The age/birthdays of a person wouldn't change that. People born after 9/11 still know New York as the place where the towers went down. Is it the same as someone who watched it live on TV? No, but the knowledge is there.

Exactly, it's about the reporting and commotion caused by the event and how that is remembered over time. In this case, people all over the world who had never heard about Charlottesville heard and read about the Nazi rally there, while some court case in the 70's about a village in Illinois isn't as memorable to people today.

The fact that you don't know about the Skokie Illinois March points to most likely Charlottesville not being known as a town for Nazi marches.

This simply doesn't follow.

Just because the media keeps harping on about this being a town for Nazi marches, doesn't make it so.

But we are not talking about what is true or not, are we? We are talking about perception. Lots of people remember Charlottesville for the Nazi rally they read about last year, because they didn't know about the place before that. It has nothing to do with what the town is really about.

Also, the US really doesn't have many Nazi rallies, there's a reason this one is being built up as big as it is. There's a major difference between the supply and demand of racists in America, hence why a lot of recent "hate crimes" turned out to be hoaxes. There's so few nazis around, that liberals have to FAKE Nazi stunts to get the "dialogue" going.

What are you even on about here man? I don't care about your apathy for fixing race relations in your country. The only thing being discussed here is whether or not Charlottesville is known for the Unite the Right rally last year.

I going to go to sleep now so we'll have to continue this tomorrow if you still want to keep up this pointless discussion by then. Untill then perhaps you could think about what sort of proof you want me to provide. Perhaps you'll find some [here on the Wikipedia page](https.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally) where you can read about how the event was covered internationally by everyone from the UN to South Park to the president himself. You can also see how many Americans had an opinion on the president's remarks one way or the other, indicating how many Americans knew about the event. I would guess that even in America, less that ~70% of adults would have heard or known anything about the town before that.

Load more comments
rutars commented on a post in r/europe
depophildchucker 35 points

Yes, of course this is an issue. But not because children are discriminated against for being a "bastard".

A substantial number of the "outside of marriage" born children will be raised by single parents, 90% of them by single mothers.

Children growing up in single parent homes, to single mothers, are generally more likely exhibit anti-social behavior later on in life, more likely to become drug / substance abusers, more likely to become criminals, less likely to get into higher education, more likely to develop mental illness and suffer a whole slew of other issues.

That and the on-going destruction of the family unit are obviously not good for society.

rutars 4 points

the on-going destruction of the family unit

What do you mean by this? What is being destroyed and why is it bad?

rutars commented on a post in r/sweden
Greystoke69 -11 points

När de säger "avbryta en graviditet" byt ut det mot "döda fostret". Tycker inte om omskrivningar som döljer verkligheten.

rutars 8 points

Kan du peka på någon människa i hela den här debatten som missat att avbruten graviditet innebär ett dött foster? Båda termerna är helt korrekta och alla inblandade vet exakt vad det talas om.

Greystoke69 1 point

Folk vet vad det innebär, men ordval spelar faktiskt en roll. Det handlar om hur man för fram sitt budskap, och om man är för abort så har man ett intresse av att säga saker som "avbryta graviditet" snarare än att man tar ett liv, dödar ett foster osv.

rutars 6 points

Men du kallar det en "omskrivning som döljer verkligheten". Vi kan beskriva aborter på hundra olika sätt beroende på vilka aspekter av det hela man finner viktigt eller intressant. Så vad är det med din formulering som gör den mer sann och ärlig än att säga "avbryta en graviditet"? Varför välja din retorik över den som används i Twitter-tråden?

rutars commented on a post in r/eu4
PersonMcGuy 64 points

Are you fucking kidding me really? This is how they fix a problem with the game? Jesus what a fucking joke, lets make the game frustrating as hell to use just because people might cheat to get achievements they can already save scum to get. That is objectively terrible game design.

rutars 49 points

It's not purely to avoid exploits. The game doesn't completely reset without restarting, and this can cause all kinds of bugs. Some of those bugs can be exploited.

rutars commented on a post in r/reverseanimalrescue
PageFault 29 points

I "stole" the gifv from this post that was posted today and ran it through https://ezgif.com/reverse.

If that's wrong... Well, I don't really care if it's wrong. I just did it for myself and thought others might enjoy it.

rutars 5 points

Oh man, I didn't realize the cat was walking backwards in the original gif.

rutars commented on a post in r/sweden
_Serene_ -27 points

Var det nödvändigt att ta upp partiet i detta fall? Ursprungliga posten alltså, i denna kedja.

rutars 30 points

Nej. Var det underhållande? Ja.

ixtus -47 points

Varför väljer du som sweddit-vänsterprofil att uppmärksamma en liten skitgrupp som dessa? Hur tänker du? (Tänker du?)

Min misstanke är att du emulerar socialdemokraternas valstrategi: att fixera sig på nazister och klaga högt och väl om hur onda de är (ja, vi håller med) för att skapa någon slags kontrast där socialdemokraterna i jämförelse är de goda.

rutars 36 points

Jag tror du tänker lite för mycket på det här, kompis.

rutars commented on a post in r/swedishproblems
weeqo789 14 points

Hahah, hon var av den äldre sorten (20-25) och jag bor inte ens i Stockholm så det är ingen fara på taket

rutars 117 points

den äldre sorten (20-25)

Jaha, här börjar la 24-års krisen då...

Kyetsi 4 points

dags för pension nu gamling.

rutars 1 point

Om det vore så väl...

rutars commented on a post in r/europe
Foggl3 12 points

Your flair for me says "We can still be friends" is there something missing?

rutars 15 points

On desktop, the flairs are flags with text in the tooltip. On mobile, you just see the text.

kostandrea 1 point

Not on the redesign

rutars 1 point

I was under the impression you could opt out of the redesign. I think I did at least. I'd Google it if I were you and wanted the old style back.

Load more comments
rutars commented on a post in r/Futurology
SuiXi3D 24 points

The time to change things was decades ago.

I absolutely believe that humanity can survive, but do I believe this generation of leaders is up to the task of caring about the people they lead rather than lining their own pockets at the expense of the very planet we all live on? No, I don’t.

rutars 54 points

It's always better to deal with the problem yesterday, but that sort of attitude breeds complacency and apathy. After all, why stop eating meat and take the train instead of the plane when we are all fucked anyway? Why vote for carbon taxes when you could vote for increased benefits or reduced taxes instead? Meanwhile, the extra emissions cause droughts and famines that could have been prevented, whch causes conflict, which causes mass migration, which causes backlash in rich countries and increased support for nationalism that, ironically, doesn't put a lot of emphasis on global problems like climate change.

You are effectively making humanity itself another positive feedback loop for climate change, because the more fucked we are, the less you will care about fixing it.

SuiXi3D 25 points

I can’t fix things. No single person can. Not by voting. Not by refusing to eat beef or use plastic straws. The ones at fault are the ones that mass produce stuff using outdated methods that spew tons of co2 into the air. The ones at fault at the ones that continue to use massive shipping vessels to move things across the ocean. The ones at fault are our leaders on all sides of the political spectrum who lie through their teeth while taking money from lobbyists of giant companies that just want to make yet more money only to hide it away somewhere and never spend it.

I’m broke. I eat what I can afford. I drive old cars. I use trash bags to line my garbage cans with. I can’t recycle because my city doesn’t give a shit. I can’t afford an electric vehicle nor the means to install a way to charge one. I use plastic bags at the grocery store because they don’t care enough to have anything else, and I don’t make enough money to worry about buying reusable ones that are made of yet more plastic. I can’t afford to put solar panels on my house even though it’s the number one thing I want to do. All the entertainment I enjoy, in one way or any other, contributes to the problem.

I live in a world that’s driven by money, and I don’t have any. I can’t change shit. Nobody in my situation can. I can’t buy a farm and use it to feed myself using old methods without gas guzzling machines.

rutars 27 points

I can’t fix things. No single person can. Not by voting.

What stops you from voting? Do you live in a non-democratic country or are there no viable candidates and policy proposals available? I certainly understand that not everyone has the opportunity and the privilege to involve themselves in the political process.

Not by refusing to eat beef or use plastic straws. The ones at fault are the ones that mass produce stuff using outdated methods that spew tons of co2 into the air.

They use those methods because people are apathetic towards it and buy their stuff anyway, and because people are suspicious of regulations that would legally mandate better methods. Even so, consumers are increasingly becoming more aware of their environmental responsibility and regulations are way better today than a decade ago. Progress is being made here, albeit to slowly.

The ones at fault at the ones that continue to use massive shipping vessels to move things across the ocean.

The shipping industry is certainly a massive part of global emissions but considering the enormous economic dependency the world has developed for cheap globalized commerce, I'm not sure categorically boycotting the shipping industry is the right way to go. There are certainly improvements that can be made to increase its efficiency and decrease our dependency on it though.

The ones at fault are our leaders on all sides of the political spectrum who lie through their teeth while taking money from lobbyists of giant companies that just want to make yet more money only to hide it away somewhere and never spend it.

Yes, but it is important to remember that not all politicians are like this, and also that in a climate like that, even good politicians will have to play dirty in order to compete. Environmentalism will not win through moral superiority, but through pragmatic political manouvering.

I’m broke. I eat what I can afford. I drive old cars. I use trash bags to line my garbage cans with. I can’t recycle because my city doesn’t give a shit. I can’t afford an electric vehicle nor the means to install a way to charge one. I use plastic bags at the grocery store because they don’t care enough to have anything else, and I don’t make enough money to worry about buying reusable ones that are made of yet more plastic. I can’t afford to put solar panels on my house even though it’s the number one thing I want to do. All the entertainment I enjoy, in one way or any other, contributes to the problem.

I live in a world that’s driven by money, and I don’t have any. I can’t change shit. Nobody in my situation can. I can’t buy a farm and use it to feed myself using old methods without gas guzzling machines.

I certainly understand your situation. I'm not demanding that you, and people like you give up what little you have in an altruistic persuit of some far of political goal. If you can't resonably do more for the environment than you already do, I can't demand that you do more. Hell, I can do more but I don't because I'm lazy and apathetic. What I'm disagreeing with is the Idea that nobody below the elites of society can affect the course of society and help solve this problem.

As a possible suggestion though, I would look into reducing your intake of animal products like meat and dairy if you haven't already. Meat consumption is the most environmentally significant and the most easily adjusted per of most people's lifestyles. But while plant based food can often be cheaper than meat, it will probably also cost you more time to learn and get going, which can often be to much for people. I'm not a strict vegetarian myself, but I pretty much never buy meat and try to avoid dairy and eggs and the like if I have the opportunity.

Load more comments
rutars commented on a post in r/IdiotsFightingThings
500
twiggez-vous 24 points

(Hijacking top comment for visibility...)

Wow, there are a lot of bots here.

There's a big ring of automated FirstnameLastname accounts which operate together, in order to farm karma. These accounts are then sold to advertisers.

in this case, OP's (u/LenaLeon) post is copied from here

rutars 5 points

Great find and that's pretty unsettling. Would the admins care about this if informed? Is there a policy of banning bots posing as people? If not there certainly should be. A platform this large will inevitably attract scammers like this, and I like to think it's in Reddits interest to keep that stuff to a minimum or people might lose interest in the platform.

rutars commented on a post in r/neoliberal
burnneer555 -4 points

are you aware of a song called bomb iran? john mccain sang it.

rutars 6 points

No I'm not. What about it?

burnneer555 0 points

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

how can you think there isnt a strong anti-iranian sentiment in the usa when this man nearly became president?

rutars 4 points

I don't have any useful opinions on the US public's sentiment towards specific nationalities because I don't live there. I wouldn't be surprised if you are right.

Load more comments
rutars commented on a post in r/changemyview
Scratch_Bandit 0 points

Really any woman in a position of academic or political influence. People on the internet condemning it are all well and good. But they don't write or vote on policy. They don't teach at university. I mean you could be in one of those positions but condemning it on Reddit and Tumblr under an alias doesn't change anything.

The way I see it those veiws I posted fit the feminist narrative according to availabile literature.

I would not vote for a political party if they did not condemn acts of bigotry within there own ranks. I would not attend family gatherings if my overtly racist uncle was invited. Why should this be different.

rutars 3 points

I went through your list of people to try to find such criticism. I wasn't really familiar with them before so I didn't really know what to expect. Here's what I found:

Barbara Jordan: she was the first black southern woman elected to the House of Representatives. That fact will of course be celebrated by faminists and civil rights advocates alike. And while she herself was a civil rights activist, I haven't found any statements of hers that describe herself as a feminist. I actually found a book stating that she actively avoided the label.. I wouldn't use her statements as some sort of feminist cannon, and I can't seem to find prominent feminists who do so either. If you've got them, I'm all ears.

Jilly Cooper: Her Wikipedia tells me she is a conservative who writes erotic novels. I fail to see how her statements could be seen as an example of feminism, let alone mainstream feminism. She also recently said that men turn gay because they fear women, which seems very far removed from modern feminism. I haven't really found prominent feminists writing about her one way or another but if you have then I'd love to see what they say.

Susan Griffin: She is described by Wikipedia as a radical feminist. I found this book, which contains a paragraph naming several contemporary feminists in both the US and the UK who disagree with Susan's views on rape as a tool of power.

Mary Daly: a self described radical feminist, she retired from Boston Collage after facing disciplinary action because of her refusal to allow male students in her advanced women's studies class. She openly admitted in the interview from which your quote originates that she is completely apathetic towards men in general. She was also anti-trans. Again, not exactly mainstream feminism. Her views seem to be best represented today in TERFs, and I'm sure you won't have any problems finding feminist critiques of them. ContraPoints on YouTube is one such feminist, but she's not exactly famous outside of the political side of YouTube.

Sally Miller Gearhart: First of all it should be said that she didn't want to reduce the male population through violence (she was a pacifist), but rather she envisioned that through the technologies of cloning or ovular merging, both of which would only produce female births, the male population would be slowly reduced over time. I don't agree with her, of course, but it's an important distinction nonetheless. Here's an article I found that describes feminist academic Cristina Hoff Summers' critique of Sally and the anti-men attitudes of many radical feminists. I think Cristina might just be the type of feminist your looking for. She has a YouTube channel where she mostly talks about men's issues and how they are underrepresented in many feminist circles.

Ultimately you and I would probably agree on many issues surrounding gender equality. The issue of whether to call ourselves feminist or not is more of a semantic one to me. What worries me is the rhetoric of many anti-feminists that seems to latch on to the extremists to use as strawmen against the moderates. I like discussing the merits of individual ideas rather than the broad categorizations of ideology for those reasons.

Edit: a missing link.

Scratch_Bandit 3 points

!delta

That article you posted about Hoff Summers was exactly what I wanted to see.

All though I find it troubling that she has soo much back lash for her work, and how even she has pointed out that the people who push the ideas that she thinks are misandric are in the positions of influence.

In fact it's very sad to see how many people refer to her as an "anti-feminist".

Edit: congrats on your first "delta", got my first recently as well.

rutars 1 point

Thank you! I mostly lurk here so it's very nice to get such a constructive response when one does decide to chime in.

I absolutely agree on the anti-feminist angle. Both feminists who feel threatened by her critique and anti-feminists who see her as an ally are guilty of that. I'm guessing that's gonna be one reason why leftists might tend to be reluctant to harshly criticize their own extremists. But that's the nature of polarization I guess.

Load more comments
rutars commented on a post in r/neoliberal
323
rutars 5 points

How do you propose we differentiate between those who are seriously devout and those who are only manipulating the devoutness of others for personal gain? I think it's obvious that the pope is pretty sincere, but what about people like Mother Teresa? What about Charlemagne or Constantine?

EGiNcholesteroL 0 points

Maybe, JUST MAYBE, a 2,000 year old religion followed by 2 billion people is a little more credible than one you obviously just made up in a reddit comment thread as an example of a fake religion

rutars 6 points

I didn't, that was someone else.

I also agree that there are more sincere followers of Catholicism than the Sociental Church. But I'm asking you about the individual leaders of established religions. Can we criticise none of them? Should I not mock L Ron Hubbard, for instance? A lot of people look up to him as a great spiritual leader worthy of praise, and they will be greatly upset if I call him a fraud. Yet he was obviously a fraud.

All I'm saying is this; you don't get to pick and choose which religious beliefs are to be mocked and what ones are sacred. Either they all are or none are. For you to place the Catholic Church above the Sociental church means you would do the same to Scientology in the 50's, or Rastafarianism in the 30's. New religions are created all the time. Do you think the founder of this religion was sincere? I don't, and neither do I think Mother Teresa or L Ron Hubbard was.

Load more comments
view more:
next ›
14,957 Karma
36 Post Karma
14,921 Comment Karma

Following this user will show all the posts they make to their profile on your front page.

About rutars

  • Reddit Birthday

    October 5, 2012

Other Interesting Profiles

    Want to make posts on your
    own profile?

    Sign up to test the Reddit post to profile beta.

    Sign up