What's Wrong with Multiculturalism? - Page 20

On August 16 2012 03:47 RvB wrote:

In practise I doubt this will work its very difficult for women to leave their husband even when they get abused and hit. And it's common in some cultures for families to kick out the women who divorce from their men which makes it extremely difficult for them to choose for the self since they're usually not well educated and it's hard for them to get a job.

On August 16 2012 21:51 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:

Actually i recall a case in the UK a few years back where a muslim woman who wore a headscarf permanently applied for a job at a hairdressing salon.The employer at the salon at the job interview asked this woman if she would take her scarf off while working at the salon so that people who went for their haircut could see her hair and maybe ask for that style and she refused.

Anyhow she did not get the job and then sued the employer and won.I'm sure the story is still out there if you want to read more about it.My point is wearing headscarves and burkhas decreases their job opportunities as well , not just their general lack of job experience or education.

On August 16 2012 22:20 Legate wrote:
What is wrong with multiculturalism?

A lot. But imo the biggest issue is, that a country which pursues a multicultural policy like the one in most western countries, over a long period of time, is basically committing ethnic and cultural suicide.

On August 17 2012 10:32 Severedevil wrote:

I certainly hope we're committing ethnic and cultural suicide. Neither is worth preserving.

The danger is not that we'll lose our culture, but that it will be replaced by a repressive, evil one.

On August 11 2012 15:42 zalz wrote:
Multiculturalism doesn't work. You need some form of cohession, some larger culture that everyone somehow feels a part of.

If not that, it is simply cultural segregation, something which is already a fact in many places in Europe.


Not all cultures are equal.

On August 17 2012 16:08 Oaky wrote:

You are stupid for putting a value on culture, which is a product of many circumstantial things.

On August 17 2012 10:32 Severedevil wrote:

I certainly hope we're committing ethnic and cultural suicide. Neither is worth preserving.

You think our culture is going to be replaced by an evil one, but also that you hope for our culture to die completely? I think there's a lot in western philosophy that is worth keeping (free inquiry, expression, association, etc) don't you?

On August 23 2012 05:00 SiroKO wrote:



I seriously don't understand why women are free to use their natural "indirect and psychological" violence while men are forced to be on a playground which isnt theirs.

The cleric's premisse is "if YOU beat your wife".
He never discussed about the reasons, but you obviously need to have a good one.

In case she harasses you psychologically very hard, or cheats with another man, I don't see anything wrong with light beating not causing any bruises.
Claiming there's virtually no scenario where light beatings could be an option is by far more extremist.

On August 23 2012 05:07 Shady Sands wrote:


Dude, physical violence in the context of an intimate relationship is never okay. Kind of scary that people still think it is.

If she's treating you like shit, it doesn't give you the right to beat her. It does, however, give you the right to leave, and leave her penniless with the divorce settlement (assuming you were smart and got a pre-nup drafted and signed in a male-friendly jurisdiction.)

On August 23 2012 05:21 SiroKO wrote:


I'm not saying direct violence is the solution.
My point is that in a few cases, I consider it to be healthier than the typical sly judiciary/psychological tricks.

Ofc, the "violence" I'm talking about has nothing to do with a beat-down or an uppercut.

On August 23 2012 05:21 SiroKO wrote:


I'm not saying direct violence is the solution.
My point is that in a few cases, I consider it to be healthier than the typical sly judiciary/psychological tricks.

Ofc, the "violence" I'm talking about has nothing to do with a beat-down or an uppercut.

On August 23 2012 06:26 Shady Sands wrote:


Here's the thing: if you ever feel the need to inflict pain, physical or emotional, your significant other, then it's time to just walk away. Love shouldn't ever be about wanting to hurt someone.

That's what I meant with the "right to leave". You always have a right to leave. That's the trump card in a relationship. The trump card should never be "I have a right to slap you around a little" or "emotionally abuse you to the point of making you suicidal".

Note that this applies for the woman just as much it does for the man. If a girl feels like she has the right to sleep around to take revenge on her boyfriend/husband, she's much better off just leaving. It's just not healthy to keep going in that sort of situation. Even if there's hope for a turnaround, chances are things will just get worse and eventually spiral out of control.

On August 23 2012 07:37 SiroKO wrote:


The thing is, the pain inflicted by men, even if it's light, is often obvious and thus (judiciarly but not only) reprehensible.
While the typical sly emotionnal harassment or persecution is indirect, by far more damaging, but cannot be seen, thus can hardly be condemned.

I see in our society how indirect violence dominates everything, and I sometimes wish people would be more direct and less hypocritical.
For instance, I much prefer being slapped in the face, rather than suddenly be ignored and having to bear her sneaky remarks on my back.

But sadly, today we only hear about violent stupid fucks, or smart never-violent gentlemen... thus when you talk about violence, even rationally, people automatically label you as a stupid machismo brute.