Political correctness is social shaming

And it’s rude.

As an addendum to a little thing I wrote previously.

http://www.xojane.com/issues/5-gaslighting-phrases-donald-trump-used-that-remind-me-a-lot-of-my-abusive-ex

“In reality, “political correctness” is just being considerate.”

Haha, no. This is a technique of manipulation called minimization (it’s just this, what’s your problem deflection) common to gaslighters, similar to You would if you loved me, it’s only… They also catastrophize trivialities regularly and screech when their lack of perspective (concern and awful priorities) is pointed out. They can’t lobby for normal things, they need special things! Special victim groups and special causes for special people!
It’s heavily politically skewed far-Left. Those things called standards are mutually agreed, as rules of etiquette and enforced politely, otherwise you’re a controlling bitch trying to manipulate a person into behaving how you consider ‘acceptable’ and calling them deficient as a human (you’re a terrible person, you’re worse than X, please kill yourself dehumanization) when they dare exert agency. Control+lies+guilt-tripping = gaslighting.

Who let you make all the rules? I didn’t vote for you.

SJWs love discusssing gaslighting only to twist the definitions at the very end.
To make you feel bad about yourself for opposing disagreeing with them. Even when you don’t know them. That’s how toxic they are.
#SJWsAlwaysLie

“And telling people not to be hateful isn’t limiting their free speech. They can still legally say what they want.”

What a contradiction. Underline: there’s your problem, slut.

Why not ban other unpleasant emotions? Anger, guilt, shame, remorse!

I guess we can take speech law crimes off the books, if social shaming is the means of enforcement!

No?

And what about accusing people of various hate crimes when you aren’t a judge? Isn’t that slander? Libel? I wonder if the new surveillance powers will be applied to SJ monster mobs. Somehow doubt it.

You know, the longer you stay with bad people, the less people sympathize. I bet she was with that terrible person for months/years, yet expects sympathy? Why not leave, really? She knew damn well what she was doing and I’d bet money he dumped her and she pines for him. I mean, she wrote a whole article on someone she claims to be over. ….O.K.

Isn’t denial a human right?

Isn’t a slur a social construct? Shouldn’t it be taken as a compliment?

If she comes here looking for attention a definition of ‘slut’, here’s one.
Slut: You slept with someone you hated. There is something wrong with you.

Social justice – anti-social revenge against the happy.

No celibacy or virgin shaming

http://sluttygirlproblems.com/guide/deal-sexual-pressure/#.Vkt0zrfhDZ4

It’s bizarre to mock people for the default, something they were born as. Shaming virgins for NOT doing something has never made logical sense, except to make sluts feel better about their non-sexual desirability and scupper the competition by making them conceal their advantage.

This doesn’t solely apply to traditional women, either.

I don’t know any masculine men who define their masculinity by their sex lives.

Honestly, not a one. They have other stuff going on, and whatever happens there, they don’t kiss and tell and keep that stuff private – one reason people respect them.

As one guy put it a tad bluntly, ‘dogs rut and they aren’t men either’.

Reminded me of the foolish definition of man as bipedal and featherless so some smartass philosopher plucked a chicken and said “Behold! A man!”

It’s the one biological function people feel the need to brag about, but it makes them look bad.

Sluts are rejected by other women, even sluts themselves

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-05-women-promiscuous-female-peers-friends.html

They're so stupid it's a laughriot

Literally nobody likes them socially (cause and effect are bidirectional). And they think behaviour is without consequence? They are “unsuitable for friendship” and long-term relationships, never ‘wife material’ certainly.

Participants’ preference for less sexually active as friends remained even when they personally reported liberal attitudes about casual sex or a high number of lifetime lovers.

They know, deep down, how fucked up they are and don’t want to deal with drama twice over, acting up because it’s the only form of attention you can scrape.
“poor psychological and ” – did it measure this? which came first?
Average men don’t want to be friends with players either:

Even sexually modest men preferred the non-permissive potential friend in only half of all variables.

Only half? Yeah, the researcher is a broad. There isn’t a ‘double standard’ as she claims. Players want wingmen friends some of the time, but still, not one more successful than them. Totally different consideration, nothing to do with ‘stigma’, what is she on?

Never occurs to these people that “stigma” is in fact, true? No studies on that, are there?
Nobody asks the question of whether the stereotypes are true? The stigma is justified? Or is the answer un-PC so they never published it?

It’s like drunk-driving and wondering why nobody trusts you with their car keys, they’re socially retarded. Social reputation in a social species, which you’re never going to change, is crucial to social survival. Don’t wanna be treated like a goatfucker? Don’t fuck any goats. They want the reward of the bad girl (behaviour) AND the reward of the good girl too (being treated with respect). They want to have their cake and eat it. It’s impossible. Nobody likes a slag (not even themselves). Never will. You have to choose and you did choose, quit crying about the consequences of your foolish agency.

Video: Virgin Shaming

I explained my take on the subject in the post Breasts are Beautiful and the history of how the flip of reverted moral expectations happened.
Nowadays, women get “virgin-shamed” more than men…. by sluts. Always by sluts, in fact, because they themselves lost something (innocence, truthfully, and pair-bonding ability, which the promiscuous lack) they subconsciously recognise is valuable to men, and since they cannot regain it, they can bully the competition into evening the playing field. This is why it’s so hard for the good guys to find women with a simply low count, women are lied to – by other women. [e.g. You have to, he’ll love you, you’re damaged]. Later on, these sluts get cut off socially, (I believe this is why) but the damage by that point is already done (usually because the bullying works or leaves a mark). It started with women, and this gave men license to do it as well (and to their own sex at ever-earlier ages). Doesn’t make it right, since unlike slut shaming, which has medical backing, everyone was born a virgin. It’s a default. There’s nothing wrong with it. Assuming a person is happy with it, they shouldn’t be pestered about that state when it’s the most intimate choice you’ll ever make, it’s a simple fact of liberty that if you wish to abstain from doing something with your body, you can.

Male virgin shaming isn’t something I’m properly qualified to discuss (being a woman). However, I think it’s a different issue to the female type because women process sex differently, intimately, and making love before our independently chosen time can screw us up for life, and to know another person, of your own sex, manipulated you into ruining something so beautiful? No wonder.

Video: “Sex positive” feminism cheapens women

It is true, nobody actually dislikes sex (or they wouldn’t exist). Possible exception: asexuals, who are in fact genophobes.

“Sex-positives” are odd ones, they come across as sluts trying to justify lack of impulse control. It’s like FEMEN protesting objectification by getting their tits out. It isn’t about sex per se, they misrepresent, it’s about casual sex, but most people approach the idea of sex with some respect, borne of the serious ramifications and consequences. They’re anti-monogamy because they can’t secure that level of investment.

 

Study: Premarital Sex, Premarital Cohabitation, and the Risk of Subsequent Marital Dissolution Among Women

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x/abstract

h/t http://socialpathology.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html

Teachman didn’t plot the risk by the number of sexual partners, merely that more than one and in different relationship contexts, so I have simply marked the range of his findings. Note, the really disturbing one still holds. A soon as a woman has had more than one partner her long term marital stability risk drops to near 50%.

What man would take those odds?

Update: you know this isn’t scientific, right?

They only studied women. There’s no smoke without fire?

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2017/05/01/hatefacts-to-trigger/

Eventually we’ll be able to arrest people for malicious disease transmission via their tinder account. STDs can be traced.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2016/10/13/the-sexist-bias-of-infidelity-stats/

Your fetishes are already in their database.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/28/someone-scraped-40000-tinder-selfies-to-make-a-facial-dataset-for-ai-experiments/