Men are socialized to be rapists

Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
734
Likes
1,559
#61
But the way you've answered has nothing to do with a toxic form of masculinity.
Being a jerk or a keyboard warrior on the internet has nothing to do with a toxic masculinity and guess what? Women can also 'talk shit' on the internet and in real life to be assertive about their feminism.
No one's saying that women can't talk shit. And there's nothing wrong with being assertive.

But my post was unnecessarily aggressive, domineering for the sake of proving "my masculinity" (although that part might not have shined through since I was riffing on the idea), and attacking another male for not being "man enough", based on my perception of masculinity. All traits of toxic masculinity.

I would like to know what you've understood of feminism and in what way it is necessary in order to fix 'men socialized to be rapists' knowing that these behaviors were promoted and normalized in movies, pop music ect.
Men don't need to be "fixed" as much as "taught". Teaching concent goes a long way to stop r*pe culture. And I don't know where you've been the last five or so years... Feminists critique all the things pop culture teaches us...

What you did there has nothing to do with masculinity. It’s you over exaggerating masculine stereotypes to make a point.
And that's what toxic masculinity is? An over-emphasis on masculine stereotypes, embraced by some men (and encouraged by some women) that are, by their nature, toxic behaviors. Yet many men (and some women) encourage these behaviors as traits of "real men".

Again, it isn't an attack on all traits that are coded masculine. It isn't an attack on the concept of masculinity. It's an attack on specific. masculine-coded traits.



Which comes off like: Men are doing something to women that women are internalizing.

Alternatively, society as a whole, rather than just men.

If there’s a toxic masculinity there should be an equal term of the feminine aspect. Not a term to which you can blame someone else for your toxicity.
Alright. If you think they should do this, what traits are commonly-coded female would you consider toxic? Pettiness isn't usually coded explicitly feminine. Neither is back-biting or manipulativeness. What do we have left? Society often considered vanity feminine by nature. So we have so toxic femininity is just... vanity.

On the other hand, when it comes to masculinity; aggressiveness, dominance, and the like are cultural-coded as masculine traits to a point where if a fictional female character is too aggressive or ruthless, she's considered less feminine.




Nobody fears women or children when it comes to revolutions or social resistance. That’s why in war they kill off the men and keep the women and children for a servant class.
Which is why Jeanne d'Arc was burnt at the stake; the authority wasn't totally afraid of what she represented. Hell, that's why women were burnt as witches in the past; the powers that be weren't at all afraid what would happen if all the women ran off and rebelled against society. Because revolution can only be violent.

Ignoring that governments aren't afraid of violent revolution in the first place, since unless the entire power structure is dismantle, the government will survive a violent revolution... We no longer live in an area where physical strength decides things. We have planes, bombs, and guns... Those things even out the playing field. German soldiers in WWII, sure as hell feared the Night Witches. In the modern era, a lot of people feel freaking women in burkas.


So that argument has very little water.
 





Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
1,456
Likes
1,639
#62
And that's what toxic masculinity is? An over-emphasis on masculine stereotypes, embraced by some men (and encouraged by some women) that are, by their nature, toxic behaviors. Yet many men (and some women) encourage these behaviors as traits of "real men".

Again, it isn't an attack on all traits that are coded masculine. It isn't an attack on the concept of masculinity. It's an attack on specific. masculine-coded traits.
Thats it. Its SOME men that go with that type of mindstate. This thread said that r*pe culture is something amongst men in general. Totally two different things. Toxic masculinity exists just as toxic femininity exists. The only thing is, only men are being talked about as being toxic. Women? Not so much.

Alright. If you think they should do this, what traits are commonly-coded female would you consider toxic? Pettiness isn't usually coded explicitly feminine. Neither is back-biting or manipulativeness. What do we have left? Society often considered vanity feminine by nature. So we have so toxic femininity is just... vanity.

On the other hand, when it comes to masculinity; aggressiveness, dominance, and the like are cultural-coded as masculine traits to a point where if a fictional female character is too aggressive or ruthless, she's considered less feminine.
[/quote]

Well I think there was a slut walk last year or the year before where women were walking around with "Im a hoe/slut/whore" signs... Do you think thats an example of toxic femininity?

Which is why Jeanne d'Arc was burnt at the stake; the authority wasn't totally afraid of what she represented. Hell, that's why women were burnt as witches in the past; the powers that be weren't at all afraid what would happen if all the women ran off and rebelled against society. Because revolution can only be violent.
But I thought you didnt believe in witches? Anyways, NO, they were not burning people for being witches while following witch/pagan concepts in catholicism... Thats a narrative, you have to look behind the curtain. Well you dont have to but its deeper than "I think shes a witch so Im going to burn her

Ignoring that governments aren't afraid of violent revolution in the first place, since unless the entire power structure is dismantle, the government will survive a violent revolution... We no longer live in an area where physical strength decides things. We have planes, bombs, and guns... Those things even out the playing field. German soldiers in WWII, sure as hell feared the Night Witches. In the modern era, a lot of people feel freaking women in burkas.


So that argument has very little water.
They wouldnt be trying to take away guns if they didnt have some type of fear of a violent revolution. But people that hold the views you do, are also down for gov't sponsored gun control (that somehow doesnt apply to the police that they are actively militarizing for whatever reason). Does that apply to you?

They dont fear women formulating a resistance. Thats why they're being empowered right now by the elite. The elite are behind feminism. They were behind Margaret Sanger. They were/are behind Planned Parenthood. Thats who's backing woman and making them go against men.. They wouldnt dare empower men to the same extent they're doing women...
 





Wigi

Established
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
207
Likes
336
#63
there's nothing wrong with being assertive.
Except when you're a man apparently.

domineering for the sake of proving "my masculinity" (although that part might not have shined through since I was riffing on the idea), and attacking another male for not being "man enough"
The same logic apply when some women think other women are 'traitors' because of their beliefs or because they value things like maternity, discretion and faithfulness toward their husband. Except that nobody scream feminazism when it happens.

Teaching concent goes a long way to stop r*pe culture. And I don't know where you've been the last five or so years... Feminists critique all the things pop culture teaches us
I don't watch TV but when I do, I hear degenerates saying that we see too much 'white males', that patriarchy is slavery and feminism is the cure for society.

I don't see how feminism solve the problems caused by our sex culture where people determine their success by the number of sex partners they had (consented or not)
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
3,329
Likes
6,631
#64
Industrial revolution. Seriously.

Also toxic masculinity and r*pe culture are two seperate ideas. Yes, they intersect but they are still seperate. They are also overarching concepts that do not say anything about individual people. They do not mean “all men”
 





Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
734
Likes
1,559
#65
Thats it. Its SOME men that go with that type of mindstate. This thread said that r*pe culture is something amongst men in general. Totally two different things. Toxic masculinity exists just as toxic femininity exists. The only thing is, only men are being talked about as being toxic. Women? Not so much.
Right. But you brought the concept of toxic masculinity into the topic, with a misunderstanding of what it is. :p

But I'll get to the whole r*pe culture thing on your next bit.


Well I think there was a slut walk last year or the year before where women were walking around with "Im a hoe/slut/whore" signs... Do you think thats an example of toxic femininity?
No, I don't. Because you know why SlutWalk happens? r*pe culture. The idea that what a woman wears or how she acts should contribute at all to her r*pe.

But I thought you didnt believe in witches? Anyways, NO, they were not burning people for being witches while following witch/pagan concepts in catholicism... Thats a narrative, you have to look behind the curtain. Well you dont have to but its deeper than "I think shes a witch so Im going to burn her
I don't believe in witches (rather, the effectiveness of witchcraft). But that doesn't mean that people didn't get burnt for being witches...

And looking behind the curtain is specifically what I did. Jeanne d'Arc wasn't killed because she wore men's clothes or even taught heresy; Jeanne d'Arc was killed because there was a cult of personality surrounding her which made her a threat to the ruling powers. Peasants and minor lords alike flocked around her. She was a threat. So she was killed.

They wouldnt be trying to take away guns if they didnt have some type of fear of a violent revolution. But people that hold the views you do, are also down for gov't sponsored gun control (that somehow doesnt apply to the police that they are actively militarizing for whatever reason). Does that apply to you?
They are "taking away" guns because they want to make you think that fighting for them makes a difference. Do you know what would happen to a violent revolution in this country? It would be put down, quickly, since if you modify civilian-grade 'assault weapons', it's still not going to compete with military hardware.

They don't fear a violent uprising because without outside interference (i.e.: backing from powers hostile to the US, like Russia or China) they would easily crush it.

They dont fear women formulating a resistance. Thats why they're being empowered right now by the elite. The elite are behind feminism. They were behind Margaret Sanger. They were/are behind Planned Parenthood. Thats who's backing woman and making them go against men.. They wouldnt dare empower men to the same extent they're doing women...
Here's the thing. No one is really being "empowered" but the brand of pop feminism that the media spits out. It's just telling women that the cruel, dog-eat-dog world we live it has a spot for them at the table if they are alright with being ruthless. And actual feminism is about equality, no matter how much you want to yell it's not... And I really don't see the media pushing stuff like Emma Goldman.
 





Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
734
Likes
1,559
#66
Except when you're a man apparently.
I haven't met a single feminist who thinks its wrong for a man to be assertive. If you cross the line, from assertive to asshole, yeah... that's an issue. But it's also an issue when women do it. See: TERFs.

The same logic apply when some women think other women are 'traitors' because of their beliefs or because they value things like maternity, discretion and faithfulness toward their husband. Except that nobody scream feminazism when it happens.

I haven't met a single feminist who's against motherhood. I've met a couple who are against monogamy but just as many in favor of it. I also haven't met a feminist who didn't ask her husbands opinion... Since you know, he's her partner... Of course, that doesn't mean she's going to listen. But no good woman, feminist or not, always listens to her husband especially if her husband is wrong.

I don't watch TV but when I do, I hear degenerates saying that we see too much 'white males', that patriarchy is slavery and feminism is the cure for society.
I've never heard that on TV. I've heard it on websites. And sometimes, I'm inclined to agree, from a cultural perspective. As a white male, 95% (if not more) caters to me. I can pick up almost any medium and find white dudes I can look to emulate. Why shouldn't other people have their heroes, too?

And patriarchy is slavery. Not because it's men in charge, mind you, but because it's hierarchical.

I don't see how feminism solve the problems caused by our sex culture where people determine their success by the number of sex partners they had (consented or not)
The core idea behind feminism (although like all -isms, you'll find people with different ideas on the big picture) is that all people, regardless of their gender, are equal and should be allowed to chose how they want to live their life and have an even playing field. Of course, not all feminism is good. Liberal feminism (what most people see) is pretty garbage since it's not revolutionary. TERFs are usually garbage people, too. But the core of feminism is something I can't see why anyone would have a problem with.
 





Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
22
Likes
37
#67
Maybe some people are weak when it comes to peer pressure. But I think it takes more to be able to physically r*pe someone. Like something deep within you must be twisted.
That's the biggest misconception about r*pe. You don't have to be twisted to be a rapist. Rapists are normal people some are twisted yes, but most of them are your brothers, your fathers your uncles. 1 out of 3 women gets raped in her lifetime, it speaks volumes.
 





Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
2
Likes
2
#68
Men are not socialized to be rapists - paranoid women are made to think that because they need to blame someone for their own paranoia. Some men are creeps, but please dont label an entire gender because of a few bad apples.
 





yiksmes

Established
Joined
Jul 13, 2017
Messages
388
Likes
788
#69
The reason this thread exists is because some parents didn't teach their children to respect both sexes.
Or done a bad job...
But teaching them that 98% men are rapists, is probably a good idea to call child services on them...
 





Etagloc

Superstar
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
5,311
Likes
8,501
#72
Yes some have that influence and are pretty powerful but let's not generalise and hint that all of Jewish people are the same.
Where did I say all Jewish people are the same? That wasn't in my post and it isn't something I believe.

People have no issue with saying Russians hacked the election. Saying Jews control the media is not that different, except it's true.

Also, I don't know of any verse in the Quran or in any scripture that says not to generalize. I have no problem with generalizing. Men tend to be more logical and women tend to be more emotional. British people tend to drink tea.

The idea that it's a sin to generalize does not come from scripture but from PC ideology.

I'm happy to apologize for my post and renounce it if you can show me from the Quran or from any saheeh hadith that it is sinful. I don't see any sin at all in it. What I said was the truth.

In fact, your post doesn't really focus on whether or not what I said was true. It only attacks what I said as being in some way immoral. But immoral on what basis? Immoral on the basis that it's not PC. However, I don't believe it's immoral from any eternal or objective perspective. And what is objectively immoral is what God says is immoral. Saying stuff like "Jews control the media" isn't actually immoral- in fact, it's a public service. It helps to point people towards the truth. I think telling people the truth is a good thing to do. I don't think the truth is immoral.

I know some people are squeamish when it comes to going against PC ideology. However, those individuals should sit back and not interfere with those who are willing to challenge it.
 





Last edited:

yiksmes

Established
Joined
Jul 13, 2017
Messages
388
Likes
788
#73
The reason this thread exists is due to Jewish influence.
If the Jewish influence is commanded somewhere in the Torah then you are right..
If not, then it isn't in the Jewish influence but some assholes who call themselves Jewish..

It's like people calling isis muslims...

Nothing to do with sin or not..
Just that some people reading this, instead of hating the assholes who call themselves Jewish, they might start hating all the Jews..

Thats where im coming from.
I know you are moral and your heart is in the right place..

Sorry if i offended you bro...
 





Etagloc

Superstar
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
5,311
Likes
8,501
#74
If the Jewish influence is commanded somewhere in the Torah then you are right..
If not, then it isn't in the Jewish influence but some assholes who call themselves Jewish..

It's like people calling isis muslims...

Nothing to do with sin or not..
Just that some people reading this, instead of hating the assholes who call themselves Jewish, they might start hating all the Jews..

Thats where im coming from.
I know you are moral and your heart is in the right place..

Sorry if i offended you bro...
I think you're a nice guy, I think you're a cool guy and I think you're well-intentioned. It's fine if we have different views.

Don't care about offending me. Seriously- I don't want you to care if you offend me. It's not a sin to offend me.

There is nothing in the Quran or in any scripture that I'm aware of that says it's a sin to offend anyone.

The very idea that it's wrong to offend people comes from PC ideology. My disagreement with you is purely over ideas and nothing against you as a person.

I think you are putting PC considerations over the truth and I think it's not right. I'm not saying it's a sin but I think it's wrong.

The reason this thread exists is due to Jewish influence. That is simply a fact.

My position is that the people should have the facts. I want the people to have the facts. What the people do with the facts is their business.

If we cover up the facts because the facts aren't PC then we're concealing the truth.

Quranically, concealing the truth is actually wrong

And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it].

-Surah Al-Baqarah 2:42

If what I am asserting is true and this movement in culture is due to Jewish influence, then we shouldn't be hiding the truth from people.

If Russians did indeed hack the elections, should we hide this fact in order to prevent anti-Russian sentiment? Should we not discuss WW2 in order to prevent anti-German sentiment?

I have never even encountered such arguments in these cases.

The very fact that people have this kind of fear when it comes to Jews only illustrates my point about their level of influence.

I think the whole narrative that Russians hacked the elections is left-wing propaganda and completely false.

However, if Russians did indeed hack the elections- would it be moral to cover this up in order to prevent anti-Russian sentiment?

It would not be. I don't think we should treat people as children and say they can't be given the truth because it's too dangerous. I say give them the truth and what they do after that is their problem.

I mean let's say we follow your proposal..... you have Jews controlling the media but following your proposal we can't actually say anything about Jews.

So this means what.... that the people have to go about blindfolded and having no idea who is running things?

Is that the fate that you want for yourself? Do you want for yourself to not be told the truth because it is allegedly too dangerous for you and you are not capable of dealing with the truth?

It would be cowardly to want that for yourself. The only sane thing is for us as people to face the truth.

It's not okay to flee from the truth out of moral cowardice.

I think the people should be given the truth and the facts- no matter the consequences. I don't care what the consequences are.

The people should be given the truth, regardless of the consequences. That is the only honorable route. The alternative is cowardice- fleeing from the truth out of fear of the consquences.
 





DevaWolf

Established
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Messages
206
Likes
368
#77
Men are not socialized to be rapists - paranoid women are made to think that because they need to blame someone for their own paranoia. Some men are creeps, but please dont label an entire gender because of a few bad apples.
By whom exactly are paranoid women made to think that?

Because men are ofcourse never part of a reason why a women could be scared.
You clearly have no idea about the lived experience of many women who get daily catcalls and other sexual intimidation. There are plenty of studies on that though, if you care to read them.
 





Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
358
Likes
585
#79
I'm curious why there's never any talk about toxic femininity - excessive jealousy, gossiping, manipulation. The natural traits of both genders can be taken to "toxic" extremes.

If you're worried the damage lust does to people and relationships, maybe you should fight to go back to monogomous societies, where sexuality is enshrined in marriage, not slutwalking lol.
 





yiksmes

Established
Joined
Jul 13, 2017
Messages
388
Likes
788
#80
I think you're a nice guy, I think you're a cool guy and I think you're well-intentioned. It's fine if we have different views.

Don't care about offending me. Seriously- I don't want you to care if you offend me. It's not a sin to offend me.

There is nothing in the Quran or in any scripture that I'm aware of that says it's a sin to offend anyone.

The very idea that it's wrong to offend people comes from PC ideology. My disagreement with you is purely over ideas and nothing against you as a person.

I think you are putting PC considerations over the truth and I think it's not right. I'm not saying it's a sin but I think it's wrong.

The reason this thread exists is due to Jewish influence. That is simply a fact.

My position is that the people should have the facts. I want the people to have the facts. What the people do with the facts is their business.

If we cover up the facts because the facts aren't PC then we're concealing the truth.

Quranically, concealing the truth is actually wrong

And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it].

-Surah Al-Baqarah 2:42

If what I am asserting is true and this movement in culture is due to Jewish influence, then we shouldn't be hiding the truth from people.

If Russians did indeed hack the elections, should we hide this fact in order to prevent anti-Russian sentiment? Should we not discuss WW2 in order to prevent anti-German sentiment?

I have never even encountered such arguments in these cases.

The very fact that people have this kind of fear when it comes to Jews only illustrates my point about their level of influence.

I think the whole narrative that Russians hacked the elections is left-wing propaganda and completely false.

However, if Russians did indeed hack the elections- would it be moral to cover this up in order to prevent anti-Russian sentiment?

It would not be. I don't think we should treat people as children and say they can't be given the truth because it's too dangerous. I say give them the truth and what they do after that is their problem.

I mean let's say we follow your proposal..... you have Jews controlling the media but following your proposal we can't actually say anything about Jews.

So this means what.... that the people have to go about blindfolded and having no idea who is running things?

Is that the fate that you want for yourself? Do you want for yourself to not be told the truth because it is allegedly too dangerous for you and you are not capable of dealing with the truth?

It would be cowardly to want that for yourself. The only sane thing is for us as people to face the truth.

It's not okay to flee from the truth out of moral cowardice.

I think the people should be given the truth and the facts- no matter the consequences. I don't care what the consequences are.

The people should be given the truth, regardless of the consequences. That is the only honorable route. The alternative is cowardice- fleeing from the truth out of fear of the consquences.
Although it does sound like PC, i just think it would be more powerful to say at least fake jew or something.
At the end of the day, the real judaism doesn't teach it's followers to corrupt..
Also if a jewish person is reading this, he might not get triggered as much and have a higher chance of agreeing with the statement..

But it's just my 2 cents..

I fully admit that i can be wrong..
Also, I don't know of any verse in the Quran or in any scripture that says not to generalize. I have no problem with generalizing. Men tend to be more logical and women tend to be more emotional. British people tend to drink tea.
Is this Sahih? :
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

كَانَ رَجُلَانِ فِي بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ مُتَوَاخِيَيْنِ فَكَانَ أَحَدُهُمَا يُذْنِبُ وَالْآخَرُ مُجْتَهِدٌ فِي الْعِبَادَةِ فَكَانَ لَا يَزَالُ الْمُجْتَهِدُ يَرَى الْآخَرَ عَلَى الذَّنْبِ فَيَقُولُ أَقْصِرْ فَوَجَدَهُ يَوْمًا عَلَى ذَنْبٍ فَقَالَ لَهُ أَقْصِرْ فَقَالَ خَلِّنِي وَرَبِّي أَبُعِثْتَ عَلَيَّ رَقِيبًا فَقَالَ وَاللَّهِ لَا يَغْفِرُ اللَّهُ لَكَ أَوْ لَا يُدْخِلُكَ اللَّهُ الْجَنَّةَ فَقَبَضَ أَرْوَاحَهُمَا فَاجْتَمَعَا عِنْدَ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ فَقَالَ لِهَذَا الْمُجْتَهِدِ أَكُنْتَ بِي عَالِمًا أَوْ كُنْتَ عَلَى مَا فِي يَدِي قَادِرًا وَقَالَ لِلْمُذْنِبِ اذْهَبْ فَادْخُلْ الْجَنَّةَ بِرَحْمَتِي وَقَالَ لِلْآخَرِ اذْهَبُوا بِهِ إِلَى النَّارِ
Two men among the children of Israel were the opposite of each other. One of them was a sinner and the other would strive in worship. The worshiper would see the sinner and tell him to stop. One day he found him sinning so he said: Stop! The sinner said: Leave me alone, by my Lord, have you been sent to watch over me? The worshiper said: By Allah, Allah will not forgive you or admit you into Paradise. Later their souls were taken and they met in the presence of the Lord of the worlds. Allah said to the worshiper: Did you have knowledge of me or power over what is in my hand? Allah said to the sinner: Enter Paradise by my mercy. And Allah said to the worshiper: Take him to the Hellfire.
Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4901, Grade: Sahih
In other words, it is never fair to compare the best of ourselves to the worst of others, lest we fall into the destructive sin of arrogance.

No matter what scheme is used to justify tribalism, whether race, culture, or religion, the outcome is always the same: racist practice. Whoever the tribalists designate as the out-group will suffer prejudice, bigotry, and discrimination meant to enhance the tribalists own privilege at the expense of those they deem inferior.

The method of tribalism is to issue blanket indictments of an entire race, culture, religion, or group of people. They will condemn an entire group for the crimes of a few, or misrepresent an entire group by only examining its worst elements.

As such, the purveyors of Islamophobia claim all Muslims are terrorists, the purveyors of anti-Semitism claim all Jews are supremacists, and the purveyors of racism claim people with different skin colors are naturally inferior to themselves. In every case, the tribalists construct a false caricature of their victims to be the straw man for their vicious attacks.

Islam teaches us to reject such blanket indictments and false generalizations. Some of the Prophet’s (ṣ) companions began to have bad thoughts about all of the Jews and Christians, but verses were revealed making clear distinctions the righteous and unrighteous among them.

Allah said:

لَيْسُوا سَوَاءً ۗ مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ أُمَّةٌ قَائِمَةٌ يَتْلُونَ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ آنَاءَ اللَّيْلِ وَهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَيُسَارِعُونَ فِي الْخَيْرَاتِ وَأُولَٰئِكَ مِنَ الصَّالِحِينَ وَمَا يَفْعَلُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَلَن يُكْفَرُوهُ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ بِالْمُتَّقِينَ
They are not all the same. Among the people of the Book is a community standing in obedience, reciting the verses of Allah during the night and prostrating in prayer. They believe in Allah and the Last Day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and hasten to do good deeds. Those are among the righteous. Whatever good deeds they do will never be denied, for Allah knows well the righteous.
Surat Ali Imran 3:113-115​
It would be wrong to negatively stereotype an entire religious group as evil, with all of its unique individuals and diverse practices. For this reason, the Prophet (ṣ) firmly censured the poets of his time who had a habit of excoriating entire tribes.

Aisha reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

إِنَّ أَعْظَمَ النَّاسِ فِرْيَةً لَرَجُلٌ هَاجَى رَجُلًا فَهَجَا الْقَبِيلَةَ بِأَسْرِهَا
Verily, the greatest liar among people is a man who insults another man by disparaging the entire tribe.
Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 3761, Grade: Sahih
In another narration, the Prophet said:

إِنَّ أَعْظَمَ النَّاسِ جُرْمًا إِنْسَانٌ شَاعِرٌ يَهْجُو الْقَبِيلَةَ مِنْ أَسْرِهَا
Verily, the greatest criminal among people is a poet who disparages the entire tribe.
Source: al-Adab al-Mufrad 870, Grade: Sahih
If we accept blanket indictments of an entire group, then we are making a claim of collective guilt that will ultimately lead to collective punishment, and collective punishment is a crime of war. Islam rejects collective guilt and punishment, in words and deeds, because innocent people may never be held accountable for the crimes of others.

Allah said:

وَلَا تَكْسِبُ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ إِلَّا عَلَيْهَا وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَىٰ
No soul earns anything except it is upon itself, and none shall bear the burdens of another.
Surat al-An’am 6:164

https://abuaminaelias.com/the-ignorance-of-tribalism-and-racism-in-islam/ (got this info from here. Don't know if it's accurate)

I don't know about offending being a sin, I think it depends on what's in your heart when you say something to someone or do..



And about the hackers and the election:
I think it's the excuse they came up with to prove the public that it's not a Selection.. If you know what i mean =)

I'm against PC and for free speech. I agree even about the Jewish influence, but it's not only them...
There's good fruits and bad fruits from all walks of life..


- Peace