-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
INGO too Harsh
- Thread starter 2A_Tom
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
femurphy77
Grandmaster
Ah blow it our your collective asses!! All this touchy feely "I love you man" crap is gonna make me puke!
halfmileharry
Grandmaster
Ah blow it our your collective asses!! All this touchy feely "I love you man" crap is gonna make me puke!
Well, we know who's totin' a Magnum pair of 'em now.
[video=youtube;-uOBveFKdGs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uOBveFKdGs[/video]
CountryBoy19
Grandmaster
FWIW, that happened a couple years ago, right around the time you became a mod and the mod that actually joined the dog-pile is no longer that active (he may not even be a mod). Maybe I was out of line even mentioning it because it does seem that things have changed.
The situation involved the mandatory pictures for all classifieds posts. I played devil's advocate for us rural folks that do not have the capable band-width, nor high-tech devices to handle uploading pictures every time we want to sell something, nor can we effectively view the classifieds when they are laden with pictures. People dog-piled me, a mod warned me that he was going to ban me for "being intentionally obtuse" so I gave it up and I no longer buy or sell anything here because I cannot upload pictures unless I make the 15 minute drive into town and sit at some place with free wifi so I can get a fast enough connection for a picture to upload. My only other option is to pay $200+ per month for satellite internet that is marginally better than the speeds I have now (marginally better than dial-up). It seems that many on INGO live in the echo-chamber of Indianapolis where they don't have to worry about things like that. That's fine, I'll take my ball elsewhere to play that game.
Last edited:
I think the real watershed moment at INGO was when the culture changed enough to allow religious freedom.
Before that, ..... well, you know.
Before that, ..... well, you know.
femurphy77
Grandmaster
CountryBoy19
Grandmaster
IMHO, ar15.com general is WAY different than the technical forums. Most mods in technical forums don't put up with BS. I stay out of GD because it's a free-for-all. Heck, they have a thread specifically for posting NSFW pictures of women; many post pictures of their wives scantily clad.
I would say technical forums on arfcom are on-par with INGO.
For the exceptionally respectful forums, hearth.com (wood-burning heat forum) and smokingmeatforum.com (everything on cooking meat, primarily on smokers & grills) are 2 exceptionally respectful forums.
A lot of the folks that have trouble with INGO either have issues in playing nice with people in general or bring trouble upon themselves in other ways.
Gun owners in general often have a tendency to be type A personalities. Some don't take well to not having their words treated as gospel. They will push back, regardless of being way or totally outnumbered on opinion/fact. This is where the "dog pile" starts.
How many that have been "dog piled" have been in the right and everyone doing the piling are wrong?
There are those that just wont learn some things. They won't be convinced that they could be mistaken regardless of the numbers and intelligence trying to convince otherwise.
CountryBoy19
Grandmaster
How many discussions where a dog pile occurred have a clear-cut black & white, right & wrong answer? VERY, VERY, VERY few of them. There are differing opinions, even differing applications and interpretations of right and wrong when there is factual information present. Many of the dog-pilers refuse to acknowledge that others can disagree with their opinion and not be "wrong". Simply because it's the popular opinion doesn't make it right. Nor does the fact that 1 side of an opinion is more vocal than the other make the more-vocal side right. I think the current state of our country is a perfect example of that. The LGBT group is "winning" because they are very vocal, that doesn't make them "right" or "more right" because there are valid concerns, opinions, and interpretations on BOTH sides of that debate.
*LGBT example used soley as an example. I do not wish to enter into a discussion on it because I'm not a vocal proponent of my opinion.
Why Leftists Hate Masculinity By Salvatore DeGennaro
An ongoing mantra of the left is that everyone is a victim, with a singular carve-out for white men. A large group of the female population has embraced this chant.
While there may be a number of grievances put forth by this movement, there also comes a theme that is particularly dangerous: the feminist attack on masculinity. This is derived not only from feminists; it comes from the left in general.
There has emerged a war on masculinity. Why? Because masculine men are harder to control under tyrannical socialism. The modern beta male, on the other hand, craves socialism. This is why the left has branded masculinity as toxic: it stands as a roadblock to their endgame.
Leftists blame, of all things, masculinity for the recent spate of sexual harassment scandals. For eons, masculinity has been considered a natural and even required trait of being male, but it is now apparently the reason for deviancy. Who knew?
The glaring problem with this argument is that the men who are typically being accused of such transgressions are anything but masculine. Sexual harassment is bipartisan; both liberal and conservative men in positions of power seem to harass women with aplomb. But where is this referenced masculinity? Harvey Weinstein? Al Franken? Louis CK? I posit that a consistent theme among most accused harassers is a complete lack of masculinity. I would go so far as to suggest that the lack of masculinity is a contributing factor to this problem.
Most of these accused public figures are modern men – perhaps not quite beta males, but certainly closer to Obama's now infamous Pajama Boy than they are to John Wayne. Are men who display a lack of masculinity less likely to victimize women? Obviously not. But the left does not let reason or rationality interfere with an opportunity to degrade social decency or further its collectivist agenda.
The feminist hatred for masculinity is only another tool in the toolbox of communism. Masculinity tends to make a man individualistic. Individualistic men are capitalists, not communists. They are men who cherish individual liberty, and they rely on themselves rather than on government. Self-reliance is a four-letter word for leftists, and masculine men are generally self-reliant. Beta males like Pajama Boy rely on government, and such modern men, devoid of any semblance of masculinity, are ideal for leftist indoctrination.
Were the frontiersmen communists or capitalists? How about the cowboys? How about the Navy SEALs or Army Rangers? Sure, the press may find in the military a few Che Guevara t-shirt-wearing idiots and parade them all over the place, but I am willing to bet that the majority of SEAL Team 6 comprises masculine capitalists.
What games do young boys play? They pretend to be cowboys. They pretend to be soldiers. They don't pretend to be soviet textile workers slaving under Stalin's system. They don't pretend to be entitled Millennial brats who congregate at Starbucks and talk about the wonders of socialism, either. Most boys hit the ground embracing masculinity. Some maintain it, but many have it berated out of them by the weak society they walk in or by their leftist parents.
Masculinity leads a man to seek to better himself in many regards, while collectivism thrives on mediocrity. Collectivism in this country is sought by the lazy who don't want to work but feel entitled to free handouts of all kinds. Unfortunately, collectivism is also touted by many who are successful, such as middle-class suburbanites who feel guilty for what they have achieved through hard work while others have not been so fortunate. Yet, when suggesting that the redistribution effort begins with their own 401(k)s, seldom will you find volunteers. Collectivism is also cheered on by certain billionaire hypocrites who made their wealth through capitalism yet now tout the wonders of socialist systems. The irony.
While these social groups appear quite different, there is a common trait among the men in all of them: no masculinity to be found. Be it the lanky hipster in skinny jeans or the billionaire hypocrite, imposing is not one of their descriptions. The billionaire may travel everywhere with a fleet of personal security, but he has no strength of body and apparently little strength of character. Are there plenty of physically weak men who are capitalists? Absolutely. Capitalism is not dependent on machismo or charisma. However, few alphas are socialist, and self-reliance is a collectivism-killer. That is why the left finds masculinity toxic.
The denigration of masculinity is high on the leftist agenda. The pushing of acceptance of the "transgender" movement is the latest machination in this crusade. This fosters further blurring of male masculinity and female femininity, and the plight of a small group of people who wrestle with this issue has become a politically polarizing topic – a tool maximized by the left. Masculinity is maligned as a trait of the bigot, not as a desirable trait among men, as it once was. The goal is to foster an entirely androgynous society that makes no distinction between male and female. This breeds a culture more easily shaped by the almighty state.
The left's war on masculinity should come as no surprise. The cultures in history that have resisted oppressive regimes in the past have celebrated masculinity rather than demeaned it.
There is an often quoted poem that sums up a society's life cycle: "hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times." The abundance of weak men in our society is ushering in those hard times, and it is celebrated by the left every step of the way.
The eradication of masculinity from our society will ultimately result in the elimination of all resistance to tyranny. Freedom-loving males know this, and women who believe in individual capability rather than dependence on the government also know it. Remember: subjugation of all to a collectivist regime is the ultimate goal, and branding masculinity as toxic is one of many pieces in the game.
An ongoing mantra of the left is that everyone is a victim, with a singular carve-out for white men. A large group of the female population has embraced this chant.
While there may be a number of grievances put forth by this movement, there also comes a theme that is particularly dangerous: the feminist attack on masculinity. This is derived not only from feminists; it comes from the left in general.
There has emerged a war on masculinity. Why? Because masculine men are harder to control under tyrannical socialism. The modern beta male, on the other hand, craves socialism. This is why the left has branded masculinity as toxic: it stands as a roadblock to their endgame.
Leftists blame, of all things, masculinity for the recent spate of sexual harassment scandals. For eons, masculinity has been considered a natural and even required trait of being male, but it is now apparently the reason for deviancy. Who knew?
The glaring problem with this argument is that the men who are typically being accused of such transgressions are anything but masculine. Sexual harassment is bipartisan; both liberal and conservative men in positions of power seem to harass women with aplomb. But where is this referenced masculinity? Harvey Weinstein? Al Franken? Louis CK? I posit that a consistent theme among most accused harassers is a complete lack of masculinity. I would go so far as to suggest that the lack of masculinity is a contributing factor to this problem.
Most of these accused public figures are modern men – perhaps not quite beta males, but certainly closer to Obama's now infamous Pajama Boy than they are to John Wayne. Are men who display a lack of masculinity less likely to victimize women? Obviously not. But the left does not let reason or rationality interfere with an opportunity to degrade social decency or further its collectivist agenda.
The feminist hatred for masculinity is only another tool in the toolbox of communism. Masculinity tends to make a man individualistic. Individualistic men are capitalists, not communists. They are men who cherish individual liberty, and they rely on themselves rather than on government. Self-reliance is a four-letter word for leftists, and masculine men are generally self-reliant. Beta males like Pajama Boy rely on government, and such modern men, devoid of any semblance of masculinity, are ideal for leftist indoctrination.
Were the frontiersmen communists or capitalists? How about the cowboys? How about the Navy SEALs or Army Rangers? Sure, the press may find in the military a few Che Guevara t-shirt-wearing idiots and parade them all over the place, but I am willing to bet that the majority of SEAL Team 6 comprises masculine capitalists.
What games do young boys play? They pretend to be cowboys. They pretend to be soldiers. They don't pretend to be soviet textile workers slaving under Stalin's system. They don't pretend to be entitled Millennial brats who congregate at Starbucks and talk about the wonders of socialism, either. Most boys hit the ground embracing masculinity. Some maintain it, but many have it berated out of them by the weak society they walk in or by their leftist parents.
Masculinity leads a man to seek to better himself in many regards, while collectivism thrives on mediocrity. Collectivism in this country is sought by the lazy who don't want to work but feel entitled to free handouts of all kinds. Unfortunately, collectivism is also touted by many who are successful, such as middle-class suburbanites who feel guilty for what they have achieved through hard work while others have not been so fortunate. Yet, when suggesting that the redistribution effort begins with their own 401(k)s, seldom will you find volunteers. Collectivism is also cheered on by certain billionaire hypocrites who made their wealth through capitalism yet now tout the wonders of socialist systems. The irony.
While these social groups appear quite different, there is a common trait among the men in all of them: no masculinity to be found. Be it the lanky hipster in skinny jeans or the billionaire hypocrite, imposing is not one of their descriptions. The billionaire may travel everywhere with a fleet of personal security, but he has no strength of body and apparently little strength of character. Are there plenty of physically weak men who are capitalists? Absolutely. Capitalism is not dependent on machismo or charisma. However, few alphas are socialist, and self-reliance is a collectivism-killer. That is why the left finds masculinity toxic.
The denigration of masculinity is high on the leftist agenda. The pushing of acceptance of the "transgender" movement is the latest machination in this crusade. This fosters further blurring of male masculinity and female femininity, and the plight of a small group of people who wrestle with this issue has become a politically polarizing topic – a tool maximized by the left. Masculinity is maligned as a trait of the bigot, not as a desirable trait among men, as it once was. The goal is to foster an entirely androgynous society that makes no distinction between male and female. This breeds a culture more easily shaped by the almighty state.
The left's war on masculinity should come as no surprise. The cultures in history that have resisted oppressive regimes in the past have celebrated masculinity rather than demeaned it.
There is an often quoted poem that sums up a society's life cycle: "hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times." The abundance of weak men in our society is ushering in those hard times, and it is celebrated by the left every step of the way.
The eradication of masculinity from our society will ultimately result in the elimination of all resistance to tyranny. Freedom-loving males know this, and women who believe in individual capability rather than dependence on the government also know it. Remember: subjugation of all to a collectivist regime is the ultimate goal, and branding masculinity as toxic is one of many pieces in the game.
What if it's rhino's lovemachine?
indiucky
Grandmaster
