Upload
Login or register

danniegurl

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: female
Age: 21
Date Signed Up:9/27/2010
Location:G ville
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#6940
Comment Ranking:#7248
Highest Content Rank:#743
Highest Comment Rank:#1637
Content Thumbs: 15655 total,  17651 ,  1996
Comment Thumbs: 9234 total,  14383 ,  5149
Content Level Progress: 28.7% (287/1000)
Level 213 Content: Comedic Genius → Level 214 Content: Comedic Genius
Comment Level Progress: 85% (85/100)
Level 283 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor → Level 284 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor
Subscribers:21
Content Views:814036
Times Content Favorited:1328 times
Total Comments Made:7780
FJ Points:10276
Favorite Tags: facebook (7) | youtube (5) | funny (3) | lawlolawl (3) | 4Chan (2) | Cake (2) | cosplay (2) | creepy (2) | Fedora (2) | Gay (2) | man (2) | on (2) | Rebecca Black (2) | Sammich (2) | sex (2) | Shrek (2) | song (2) | travel (2) | troll (2) | tumblr (2)
I'm a pretty open minded person.
I have all types of friends, and so far no enemies.
My favorite color is green.
Rock is my favorite, but I listen to almost everything else.
I only care what the people that matter think of me.

Edit: So a lot of you have asked, and no, I don't post NSFW of myself and I don't plan to.

Text Posts

  • Views: 1066
    Thumbs Up 5 Thumbs Down 1 Total: +4
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 2
    Uploaded: 02/16/15
    Bark Bark
  • Views: 1010
    Thumbs Up 4 Thumbs Down 0 Total: +4
    Comments: 1
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 01/19/15
    So what do you do for work? So what do you do for work?
  • Views: 36575
    Thumbs Up 944 Thumbs Down 52 Total: +892
    Comments: 291
    Favorites: 253
    Uploaded: 12/16/15
    How to get the girl How to get the girl
  • Views: 12302
    Thumbs Up 227 Thumbs Down 12 Total: +215
    Comments: 48
    Favorites: 13
    Uploaded: 12/23/15
    You Monster! You Monster!
  • Views: 13659
    Thumbs Up 164 Thumbs Down 25 Total: +139
    Comments: 18
    Favorites: 6
    Uploaded: 04/28/15
    Mom catches son rioting. Mom catches son rioting.
  • Views: 14842
    Thumbs Up 141 Thumbs Down 36 Total: +105
    Comments: 19
    Favorites: 13
    Uploaded: 08/03/14
    Look at all that funny Look at all that funny
  • Views: 5448
    Thumbs Up 47 Thumbs Down 9 Total: +38
    Comments: 9
    Favorites: 4
    Uploaded: 06/22/15
    Wait for it. Wait for it.
  • Views: 1626
    Thumbs Up 15 Thumbs Down 3 Total: +12
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 2
    Uploaded: 06/22/15
    What's going on? What's going on?

HD Gifs / WebMs

  • Views: 12682
    Thumbs Up 261 Thumbs Down 13 Total: +248
    Comments: 22
    Favorites: 35
    Uploaded: 03/26/16
    Strippersaurus Strippersaurus
  • Views: 25963
    Thumbs Up 514 Thumbs Down 38 Total: +476
    Comments: 67
    Favorites: 41
    Uploaded: 04/19/15
    Strangely arousing. Strangely arousing.
  • Views: 676
    Thumbs Up 22 Thumbs Down 2 Total: +20
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 03/26/11
    Wobbly Wobbly
  • Views: 5234
    Thumbs Up 20 Thumbs Down 3 Total: +17
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 2
    Uploaded: 09/24/14
    Fuck you! Fuck you!
  • Views: 1589
    Thumbs Up 16 Thumbs Down 6 Total: +10
    Comments: 5
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 06/26/11
    We Could've Had it All We Could've Had it All
  • Views: 765
    Thumbs Up 8 Thumbs Down 2 Total: +6
    Comments: 2
    Favorites: 1
    Uploaded: 12/24/11
    Get Over the Cliff Get Over the Cliff
  • Views: 1081
    Thumbs Up 6 Thumbs Down 4 Total: +2
    Comments: 1
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/23/14
    Human Mop Human Mop

latest user's comments

#131 - I mean the original post this is responding to is about americ… 06/21/2016 on 1973 0
#115 - Deserving it or not isn't the point. My point was there's no w…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/21/2016 on 1973 0
User avatar
#117 - empirennn (06/21/2016) [-]
Yeah, well all of the scenarios are just fake. Overly friendly people in scenarios that only a pure optimist/delusional could cook up and insane overreactions in the other.
#112 - Bringing it in your car is still on campus grounds. Many schoo…  [+] (3 new replies) 06/21/2016 on 1973 0
User avatar
#113 - empirennn (06/21/2016) [-]
Well if that was the case then you'd pretty much be at fault for doing such then. It would be a stupid rich kid, so he'd deserve it.
User avatar
#115 - danniegurl (06/21/2016) [-]
Deserving it or not isn't the point. My point was there's no way in hell it's going to go down like >>#34
User avatar
#117 - empirennn (06/21/2016) [-]
Yeah, well all of the scenarios are just fake. Overly friendly people in scenarios that only a pure optimist/delusional could cook up and insane overreactions in the other.
#92 - The first one you did is definitely not right. I've heard of k…  [+] (8 new replies) 06/20/2016 on 1973 +1
User avatar
#130 - kinginthenorthh (06/21/2016) [-]
The kid was going hunting after school. This is Canada so school shootings aren't that common here
User avatar
#131 - danniegurl (06/21/2016) [-]
I mean the original post this is responding to is about america. you never specified in canada.
User avatar
#111 - empirennn (06/21/2016) [-]
They didn't bring it to class. They brought it in their car. Which in this scenario it's what, a rich kid who wants to show off? yeah, it's ok if you tell that kid not to flash his gun when he's driving around.
User avatar
#112 - danniegurl (06/21/2016) [-]
Bringing it in your car is still on campus grounds. Many schools have zero tolerance policies. Therefore, they'd get expelled.
User avatar
#113 - empirennn (06/21/2016) [-]
Well if that was the case then you'd pretty much be at fault for doing such then. It would be a stupid rich kid, so he'd deserve it.
User avatar
#115 - danniegurl (06/21/2016) [-]
Deserving it or not isn't the point. My point was there's no way in hell it's going to go down like >>#34
User avatar
#117 - empirennn (06/21/2016) [-]
Yeah, well all of the scenarios are just fake. Overly friendly people in scenarios that only a pure optimist/delusional could cook up and insane overreactions in the other.
#94 - NinjaxPandaa (06/20/2016) [-]
if i remember right there was a whole thing about a kid getting into a lot of trouble because their grandfathers/mothers pocket watch they gave them had a tiny letter opener thing in it that could pop out.
#111 - How in the hell is it sexist to say that genders are different…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/12/2016 on Double Standards 0
#112 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Keep embarrassing yourself.
#114 - whathasbeengiven (06/12/2016) [-]
>>#102 Your initial argument was invalid anyways. You need to know the context of the article to see why they brought up gender.

Maybe the author was emphasizing the needs for donated items that help women in homeless shelters. Maybe the author wasn't even trying to tackle the big homeless problem, just the difference in donated items.

You're blowing this out of proportion because you have a bias against idiotic feminists. That bias is what creates the viewer's misconception that the little statistic in the OP was totally a "feminist logic" screw-up. How can you truly know without reading the article though? That's why you initially thought the article had hints of sexism and rousing a gender war, you preconceived this with your bias.

Homelessness statistics shouldn't be used as a competition to see which gender has it worse. But the person you were arguing with showed why gender could reasonably be brought up.

>>#110, >>#108 You're unaware of the point being raised against yours.

" I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home."
>>#104

But is the article talking about it? You don't know, so your initial "argument" (*question*) needs to be answered by knowing what the article talks about. Otherwise you're stuck in your "They want a gender war!! The article says it, because they statistic clearly summarizes the article's intent. Why do they want a gender war, i've lost faith in humanit... ". And that digresses from the necessary question: what's the context?

Dude reread your comments and realize you're the one going off on tangents because you don't have all the information, because you jumped to conclusions with your bias.

"It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. "

huh?
It's incredibly sexist for them to unintentionally do something you merely think is sex-divisive?

So is it sexist for me to say "male rape victims, who make up a minority of rape victims, need to be given more focus and some support in this whole rape issue", even if I wasn't trying to be 'sexist' or divisive? That's not sexist.
Is it? But that's what you're saying.

pic for my future reference
#109 - I'm not saying I know what the article is about. I posed a pot…  [+] (4 new replies) 06/12/2016 on Double Standards 0
#110 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Enjoy your one sided argument. Also good luck spreading sexist views when sex shouldn't even be taken into account. You're what's wrong with this generation.
User avatar
#111 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
How in the hell is it sexist to say that genders are different and thus face different problems? It's a fact.
Is it sexist to say that prostate cancer is a problem for men? Yes, cancer as a whole is the larger issue, but prostate cancer is still an issue, because it affects men differently than other kinds of cancers would. In case you don't understand, what I'm doing right now is using a comparison to demonstrate a point.
#112 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Keep embarrassing yourself.
#114 - whathasbeengiven (06/12/2016) [-]
>>#102 Your initial argument was invalid anyways. You need to know the context of the article to see why they brought up gender.

Maybe the author was emphasizing the needs for donated items that help women in homeless shelters. Maybe the author wasn't even trying to tackle the big homeless problem, just the difference in donated items.

You're blowing this out of proportion because you have a bias against idiotic feminists. That bias is what creates the viewer's misconception that the little statistic in the OP was totally a "feminist logic" screw-up. How can you truly know without reading the article though? That's why you initially thought the article had hints of sexism and rousing a gender war, you preconceived this with your bias.

Homelessness statistics shouldn't be used as a competition to see which gender has it worse. But the person you were arguing with showed why gender could reasonably be brought up.

>>#110, >>#108 You're unaware of the point being raised against yours.

" I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home."
>>#104

But is the article talking about it? You don't know, so your initial "argument" (*question*) needs to be answered by knowing what the article talks about. Otherwise you're stuck in your "They want a gender war!! The article says it, because they statistic clearly summarizes the article's intent. Why do they want a gender war, i've lost faith in humanit... ". And that digresses from the necessary question: what's the context?

Dude reread your comments and realize you're the one going off on tangents because you don't have all the information, because you jumped to conclusions with your bias.

"It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. "

huh?
It's incredibly sexist for them to unintentionally do something you merely think is sex-divisive?

So is it sexist for me to say "male rape victims, who make up a minority of rape victims, need to be given more focus and some support in this whole rape issue", even if I wasn't trying to be 'sexist' or divisive? That's not sexist.
Is it? But that's what you're saying.

pic for my future reference
#105 - I'm assuming you haven't read the original article, correct? B…  [+] (6 new replies) 06/12/2016 on Double Standards 0
User avatar
#108 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
And neither have you. Which again doesn't make you any more right. If the entire article was about separating genders for the homeless issue than I've lost more faith in humanity. The fact that people would go so far as to try to bring more awareness to a specific gender in a universal issue like homelessness is incredibly pointless and sad. In this case it's sexists. It's putting more focus on one gender over another in a GENDER NEUTRAL issue. Do you understand that? There isn't even a reason to discuss how pointless it is to include such a statistic or write such an article and I've clearly wasted my time trying to prove such an obvious point to someone who honestly thinks people need to be educated about unwarranted separate gender issues proposed in a very sexist manner. Congrats on trolling me.
User avatar
#109 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm not saying I know what the article is about. I posed a potential point they could be making as to why the statistic would be relevant because you asked why it would be.
If you can't understand that the same problem (in this case homelessness) affects different groups of people differently, then you're hopeless.
This is an example of an article in which the statistic is relevant mashable.com/2016/04/13/homeless-women-challenges/#af1ILyOWmSqB
Homelessness isn't a gender neutral issue because it affects the genders in different ways. It's not sexist to say that homeless women need tampons and pads that they aren't getting.
#110 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Enjoy your one sided argument. Also good luck spreading sexist views when sex shouldn't even be taken into account. You're what's wrong with this generation.
User avatar
#111 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
How in the hell is it sexist to say that genders are different and thus face different problems? It's a fact.
Is it sexist to say that prostate cancer is a problem for men? Yes, cancer as a whole is the larger issue, but prostate cancer is still an issue, because it affects men differently than other kinds of cancers would. In case you don't understand, what I'm doing right now is using a comparison to demonstrate a point.
#112 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Keep embarrassing yourself.
#114 - whathasbeengiven (06/12/2016) [-]
>>#102 Your initial argument was invalid anyways. You need to know the context of the article to see why they brought up gender.

Maybe the author was emphasizing the needs for donated items that help women in homeless shelters. Maybe the author wasn't even trying to tackle the big homeless problem, just the difference in donated items.

You're blowing this out of proportion because you have a bias against idiotic feminists. That bias is what creates the viewer's misconception that the little statistic in the OP was totally a "feminist logic" screw-up. How can you truly know without reading the article though? That's why you initially thought the article had hints of sexism and rousing a gender war, you preconceived this with your bias.

Homelessness statistics shouldn't be used as a competition to see which gender has it worse. But the person you were arguing with showed why gender could reasonably be brought up.

>>#110, >>#108 You're unaware of the point being raised against yours.

" I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home."
>>#104

But is the article talking about it? You don't know, so your initial "argument" (*question*) needs to be answered by knowing what the article talks about. Otherwise you're stuck in your "They want a gender war!! The article says it, because they statistic clearly summarizes the article's intent. Why do they want a gender war, i've lost faith in humanit... ". And that digresses from the necessary question: what's the context?

Dude reread your comments and realize you're the one going off on tangents because you don't have all the information, because you jumped to conclusions with your bias.

"It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. "

huh?
It's incredibly sexist for them to unintentionally do something you merely think is sex-divisive?

So is it sexist for me to say "male rape victims, who make up a minority of rape victims, need to be given more focus and some support in this whole rape issue", even if I wasn't trying to be 'sexist' or divisive? That's not sexist.
Is it? But that's what you're saying.

pic for my future reference
#103 - Well obviously whatever the article is isn't only saying "…  [+] (8 new replies) 06/12/2016 on Double Standards 0
User avatar
#104 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
In this case yes they did throw the statistic out for nothing. That's the whole point of this argument. What point are they making that matters?? Who cares what gender homeless people are?? Again you're bringing hygiene for example into this. I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home. I honestly can't make this any more simple for you. Are you trolling me right now? "I don't think their point was to put a homeless person into a home".. The statistic (although pointlessly separated by gender) was concerning the issue of homeless people. Their's was not a useful statistic is my point. Don't just put in "hurr durr women are homeless too", instead of trying to focus the issue on a gender, why don't they do the logical thing and include a % of homeless people based on the total population in order to raise awareness?? And you're last sentence just proved my point. It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. The fact that people think it's relevant to bring awareness to separate genders in an issue like homelessness is disgusting and I fear for the future of journalism and future generations.
User avatar
#105 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm assuming you haven't read the original article, correct? Because you have no idea what point the article was trying to make in order to assume that it was about finding homeless people homes.
If the point of the article is that homeless women face certain issues that homeless men do not, then the statistic is useful, which was the point of my original reply.
It's not sexist to state a fact. If homeless women are having certain issues (IE menstruation), then those need to be taken care of. If homeless men are having certain issues (IE prostate health), then those need to be taken care of. Men and women have different issues because they are not physiologically the same, it's not that hard of a concept to grasp.
User avatar
#108 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
And neither have you. Which again doesn't make you any more right. If the entire article was about separating genders for the homeless issue than I've lost more faith in humanity. The fact that people would go so far as to try to bring more awareness to a specific gender in a universal issue like homelessness is incredibly pointless and sad. In this case it's sexists. It's putting more focus on one gender over another in a GENDER NEUTRAL issue. Do you understand that? There isn't even a reason to discuss how pointless it is to include such a statistic or write such an article and I've clearly wasted my time trying to prove such an obvious point to someone who honestly thinks people need to be educated about unwarranted separate gender issues proposed in a very sexist manner. Congrats on trolling me.
User avatar
#109 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm not saying I know what the article is about. I posed a potential point they could be making as to why the statistic would be relevant because you asked why it would be.
If you can't understand that the same problem (in this case homelessness) affects different groups of people differently, then you're hopeless.
This is an example of an article in which the statistic is relevant mashable.com/2016/04/13/homeless-women-challenges/#af1ILyOWmSqB
Homelessness isn't a gender neutral issue because it affects the genders in different ways. It's not sexist to say that homeless women need tampons and pads that they aren't getting.
#110 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Enjoy your one sided argument. Also good luck spreading sexist views when sex shouldn't even be taken into account. You're what's wrong with this generation.
User avatar
#111 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
How in the hell is it sexist to say that genders are different and thus face different problems? It's a fact.
Is it sexist to say that prostate cancer is a problem for men? Yes, cancer as a whole is the larger issue, but prostate cancer is still an issue, because it affects men differently than other kinds of cancers would. In case you don't understand, what I'm doing right now is using a comparison to demonstrate a point.
#112 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Keep embarrassing yourself.
#114 - whathasbeengiven (06/12/2016) [-]
>>#102 Your initial argument was invalid anyways. You need to know the context of the article to see why they brought up gender.

Maybe the author was emphasizing the needs for donated items that help women in homeless shelters. Maybe the author wasn't even trying to tackle the big homeless problem, just the difference in donated items.

You're blowing this out of proportion because you have a bias against idiotic feminists. That bias is what creates the viewer's misconception that the little statistic in the OP was totally a "feminist logic" screw-up. How can you truly know without reading the article though? That's why you initially thought the article had hints of sexism and rousing a gender war, you preconceived this with your bias.

Homelessness statistics shouldn't be used as a competition to see which gender has it worse. But the person you were arguing with showed why gender could reasonably be brought up.

>>#110, >>#108 You're unaware of the point being raised against yours.

" I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home."
>>#104

But is the article talking about it? You don't know, so your initial "argument" (*question*) needs to be answered by knowing what the article talks about. Otherwise you're stuck in your "They want a gender war!! The article says it, because they statistic clearly summarizes the article's intent. Why do they want a gender war, i've lost faith in humanit... ". And that digresses from the necessary question: what's the context?

Dude reread your comments and realize you're the one going off on tangents because you don't have all the information, because you jumped to conclusions with your bias.

"It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. "

huh?
It's incredibly sexist for them to unintentionally do something you merely think is sex-divisive?

So is it sexist for me to say "male rape victims, who make up a minority of rape victims, need to be given more focus and some support in this whole rape issue", even if I wasn't trying to be 'sexist' or divisive? That's not sexist.
Is it? But that's what you're saying.

pic for my future reference
#101 - The thing is you can't take care of the big issue right away. …  [+] (10 new replies) 06/12/2016 on Double Standards 0
User avatar
#102 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Then they should have made a statistic that took into account starving people. That's not the issue in the article. You are losing sight of the initial argument entirely with your other "examples". No shit we need to take care of smaller issues but feeding or giving a job to a homeless person doesn't affect the homeless statistic. Which is what I was arguing about while you went off on a tangent. And why should we be aware of the differences between genders? What exactly does that solve in THIS case? I don't care about the other problems of either gender if you're not discussing putting a homeless person in a home. How does being a homeless man or woman affect making them not homeless? If you haven't figured it out by now, I've been asking rhetorical questions.
User avatar
#103 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
Well obviously whatever the article is isn't only saying "1 in 4 homeless people are women" People don't throw out statistics for nothing, they use them to make a point. I was posing that a potential point could be how homeless women aren't getting the hygiene care that they need. We obviously don't see the point they were making because that's been cut off, but I highly doubt their point was about how to find homeless people a home. It was more than likely about the problems that female homeless people encounter.
User avatar
#104 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
In this case yes they did throw the statistic out for nothing. That's the whole point of this argument. What point are they making that matters?? Who cares what gender homeless people are?? Again you're bringing hygiene for example into this. I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home. I honestly can't make this any more simple for you. Are you trolling me right now? "I don't think their point was to put a homeless person into a home".. The statistic (although pointlessly separated by gender) was concerning the issue of homeless people. Their's was not a useful statistic is my point. Don't just put in "hurr durr women are homeless too", instead of trying to focus the issue on a gender, why don't they do the logical thing and include a % of homeless people based on the total population in order to raise awareness?? And you're last sentence just proved my point. It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. The fact that people think it's relevant to bring awareness to separate genders in an issue like homelessness is disgusting and I fear for the future of journalism and future generations.
User avatar
#105 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm assuming you haven't read the original article, correct? Because you have no idea what point the article was trying to make in order to assume that it was about finding homeless people homes.
If the point of the article is that homeless women face certain issues that homeless men do not, then the statistic is useful, which was the point of my original reply.
It's not sexist to state a fact. If homeless women are having certain issues (IE menstruation), then those need to be taken care of. If homeless men are having certain issues (IE prostate health), then those need to be taken care of. Men and women have different issues because they are not physiologically the same, it's not that hard of a concept to grasp.
User avatar
#108 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
And neither have you. Which again doesn't make you any more right. If the entire article was about separating genders for the homeless issue than I've lost more faith in humanity. The fact that people would go so far as to try to bring more awareness to a specific gender in a universal issue like homelessness is incredibly pointless and sad. In this case it's sexists. It's putting more focus on one gender over another in a GENDER NEUTRAL issue. Do you understand that? There isn't even a reason to discuss how pointless it is to include such a statistic or write such an article and I've clearly wasted my time trying to prove such an obvious point to someone who honestly thinks people need to be educated about unwarranted separate gender issues proposed in a very sexist manner. Congrats on trolling me.
User avatar
#109 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm not saying I know what the article is about. I posed a potential point they could be making as to why the statistic would be relevant because you asked why it would be.
If you can't understand that the same problem (in this case homelessness) affects different groups of people differently, then you're hopeless.
This is an example of an article in which the statistic is relevant mashable.com/2016/04/13/homeless-women-challenges/#af1ILyOWmSqB
Homelessness isn't a gender neutral issue because it affects the genders in different ways. It's not sexist to say that homeless women need tampons and pads that they aren't getting.
#110 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Enjoy your one sided argument. Also good luck spreading sexist views when sex shouldn't even be taken into account. You're what's wrong with this generation.
User avatar
#111 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
How in the hell is it sexist to say that genders are different and thus face different problems? It's a fact.
Is it sexist to say that prostate cancer is a problem for men? Yes, cancer as a whole is the larger issue, but prostate cancer is still an issue, because it affects men differently than other kinds of cancers would. In case you don't understand, what I'm doing right now is using a comparison to demonstrate a point.
#112 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Keep embarrassing yourself.
#114 - whathasbeengiven (06/12/2016) [-]
>>#102 Your initial argument was invalid anyways. You need to know the context of the article to see why they brought up gender.

Maybe the author was emphasizing the needs for donated items that help women in homeless shelters. Maybe the author wasn't even trying to tackle the big homeless problem, just the difference in donated items.

You're blowing this out of proportion because you have a bias against idiotic feminists. That bias is what creates the viewer's misconception that the little statistic in the OP was totally a "feminist logic" screw-up. How can you truly know without reading the article though? That's why you initially thought the article had hints of sexism and rousing a gender war, you preconceived this with your bias.

Homelessness statistics shouldn't be used as a competition to see which gender has it worse. But the person you were arguing with showed why gender could reasonably be brought up.

>>#110, >>#108 You're unaware of the point being raised against yours.

" I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home."
>>#104

But is the article talking about it? You don't know, so your initial "argument" (*question*) needs to be answered by knowing what the article talks about. Otherwise you're stuck in your "They want a gender war!! The article says it, because they statistic clearly summarizes the article's intent. Why do they want a gender war, i've lost faith in humanit... ". And that digresses from the necessary question: what's the context?

Dude reread your comments and realize you're the one going off on tangents because you don't have all the information, because you jumped to conclusions with your bias.

"It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. "

huh?
It's incredibly sexist for them to unintentionally do something you merely think is sex-divisive?

So is it sexist for me to say "male rape victims, who make up a minority of rape victims, need to be given more focus and some support in this whole rape issue", even if I wasn't trying to be 'sexist' or divisive? That's not sexist.
Is it? But that's what you're saying.

pic for my future reference
#99 - Well yes, homelessness is the bigger issue, but that doesn't m…  [+] (12 new replies) 06/12/2016 on Double Standards 0
User avatar
#100 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Or we should focus on the bigger issues before we tackle the smaller ones. Instead of "oh my god there are so many homeless women, NOW we should take action". That's the ideal that the statistic promotes. It should be, lets find all these people homes, and then take care of the smaller issues like periods or food or whatever. There's absolutely no reason to separate such a statistic by gender. I have no idea why you are bringing up other issues that aren't what's being discussed. It doesn't make you any more right.
User avatar
#101 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
The thing is you can't take care of the big issue right away. Those things take time, and the smaller issues still matter in the meantime, and often affect the success of the big one getting solved.
How is a homeless person supposed to get a home if they die of starvation beforehand because they didn't have food? And how is a homeless person supposed to get a home if they don't have a job, because they couldn't get clean for the interview, or stay clean while they were working?
To think those smaller issues don't matter until the bigger issue is solved is, frankly, stupid.

I brought up another issue to make a point, that you have to think about an issue from all ends to plan a course of action in order to solve the problem, and gender is one of those factors. The actual point you were making wasn't about homelessness itself, but why gender wasn't relevant to homelessness because it's not a competition. My point is that gender (male or female) is relevant to multiple issues, not to say one or the other has it worse, but that it's a factor.
User avatar
#102 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Then they should have made a statistic that took into account starving people. That's not the issue in the article. You are losing sight of the initial argument entirely with your other "examples". No shit we need to take care of smaller issues but feeding or giving a job to a homeless person doesn't affect the homeless statistic. Which is what I was arguing about while you went off on a tangent. And why should we be aware of the differences between genders? What exactly does that solve in THIS case? I don't care about the other problems of either gender if you're not discussing putting a homeless person in a home. How does being a homeless man or woman affect making them not homeless? If you haven't figured it out by now, I've been asking rhetorical questions.
User avatar
#103 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
Well obviously whatever the article is isn't only saying "1 in 4 homeless people are women" People don't throw out statistics for nothing, they use them to make a point. I was posing that a potential point could be how homeless women aren't getting the hygiene care that they need. We obviously don't see the point they were making because that's been cut off, but I highly doubt their point was about how to find homeless people a home. It was more than likely about the problems that female homeless people encounter.
User avatar
#104 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
In this case yes they did throw the statistic out for nothing. That's the whole point of this argument. What point are they making that matters?? Who cares what gender homeless people are?? Again you're bringing hygiene for example into this. I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home. I honestly can't make this any more simple for you. Are you trolling me right now? "I don't think their point was to put a homeless person into a home".. The statistic (although pointlessly separated by gender) was concerning the issue of homeless people. Their's was not a useful statistic is my point. Don't just put in "hurr durr women are homeless too", instead of trying to focus the issue on a gender, why don't they do the logical thing and include a % of homeless people based on the total population in order to raise awareness?? And you're last sentence just proved my point. It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. The fact that people think it's relevant to bring awareness to separate genders in an issue like homelessness is disgusting and I fear for the future of journalism and future generations.
User avatar
#105 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm assuming you haven't read the original article, correct? Because you have no idea what point the article was trying to make in order to assume that it was about finding homeless people homes.
If the point of the article is that homeless women face certain issues that homeless men do not, then the statistic is useful, which was the point of my original reply.
It's not sexist to state a fact. If homeless women are having certain issues (IE menstruation), then those need to be taken care of. If homeless men are having certain issues (IE prostate health), then those need to be taken care of. Men and women have different issues because they are not physiologically the same, it's not that hard of a concept to grasp.
User avatar
#108 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
And neither have you. Which again doesn't make you any more right. If the entire article was about separating genders for the homeless issue than I've lost more faith in humanity. The fact that people would go so far as to try to bring more awareness to a specific gender in a universal issue like homelessness is incredibly pointless and sad. In this case it's sexists. It's putting more focus on one gender over another in a GENDER NEUTRAL issue. Do you understand that? There isn't even a reason to discuss how pointless it is to include such a statistic or write such an article and I've clearly wasted my time trying to prove such an obvious point to someone who honestly thinks people need to be educated about unwarranted separate gender issues proposed in a very sexist manner. Congrats on trolling me.
User avatar
#109 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
I'm not saying I know what the article is about. I posed a potential point they could be making as to why the statistic would be relevant because you asked why it would be.
If you can't understand that the same problem (in this case homelessness) affects different groups of people differently, then you're hopeless.
This is an example of an article in which the statistic is relevant mashable.com/2016/04/13/homeless-women-challenges/#af1ILyOWmSqB
Homelessness isn't a gender neutral issue because it affects the genders in different ways. It's not sexist to say that homeless women need tampons and pads that they aren't getting.
#110 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Enjoy your one sided argument. Also good luck spreading sexist views when sex shouldn't even be taken into account. You're what's wrong with this generation.
User avatar
#111 - danniegurl (06/12/2016) [-]
How in the hell is it sexist to say that genders are different and thus face different problems? It's a fact.
Is it sexist to say that prostate cancer is a problem for men? Yes, cancer as a whole is the larger issue, but prostate cancer is still an issue, because it affects men differently than other kinds of cancers would. In case you don't understand, what I'm doing right now is using a comparison to demonstrate a point.
#112 - xdiabolicx (06/12/2016) [-]
Keep embarrassing yourself.
#114 - whathasbeengiven (06/12/2016) [-]
>>#102 Your initial argument was invalid anyways. You need to know the context of the article to see why they brought up gender.

Maybe the author was emphasizing the needs for donated items that help women in homeless shelters. Maybe the author wasn't even trying to tackle the big homeless problem, just the difference in donated items.

You're blowing this out of proportion because you have a bias against idiotic feminists. That bias is what creates the viewer's misconception that the little statistic in the OP was totally a "feminist logic" screw-up. How can you truly know without reading the article though? That's why you initially thought the article had hints of sexism and rousing a gender war, you preconceived this with your bias.

Homelessness statistics shouldn't be used as a competition to see which gender has it worse. But the person you were arguing with showed why gender could reasonably be brought up.

>>#110, >>#108 You're unaware of the point being raised against yours.

" I. Don't. Care. I'm talking about putting a homeless person into a home."
>>#104

But is the article talking about it? You don't know, so your initial "argument" (*question*) needs to be answered by knowing what the article talks about. Otherwise you're stuck in your "They want a gender war!! The article says it, because they statistic clearly summarizes the article's intent. Why do they want a gender war, i've lost faith in humanit... ". And that digresses from the necessary question: what's the context?

Dude reread your comments and realize you're the one going off on tangents because you don't have all the information, because you jumped to conclusions with your bias.

"It's actually incredibly sexist to try to divide the issue like that and try to place importance on homeless women over homeless men even if they did it unintentionally. "

huh?
It's incredibly sexist for them to unintentionally do something you merely think is sex-divisive?

So is it sexist for me to say "male rape victims, who make up a minority of rape victims, need to be given more focus and some support in this whole rape issue", even if I wasn't trying to be 'sexist' or divisive? That's not sexist.
Is it? But that's what you're saying.

pic for my future reference