Really????

Really???? | *GIRLS* CAN NOW BECOME "BOY SCOUTS" IF ONLY THERE WAS SOMETHING CALLED "GIRL SCOUTS" THEY COULD JOIN. | image tagged in memes,face you make robert downey jr,politics,political meme,political,first world problems | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
22,977 views, 260 upvotes
Face You Make Robert Downey Jr memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
22 ups, 2 replies
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
lol
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
reply
4 ups
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
Lol. Cookie Monster has a one track mind! :)
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
4 ups
reply
12 ups, 1 reply
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
reply
6 ups
reply
12 ups, 2 replies
I was in Boy Scouts growing up. One year, I went to an international Scouting camp in California, with Scouts from all over the world: Japan, Nigeria, Canada, Ireland, the Philippines, Germany, Austria, etc. most of those countries had "scouting," not separate organizations for boys and girls. I fail to see the problem with co-ed scouting.
reply
5 ups, 3 replies
I have no problem with co-ed activities. I don't have a problem with boys and girls doing stuff together. lol, I like women, and I like doing activities with them. But I feel like this is about the blurring of gender identity. This is about the spectrum of gender identity that has an unmet burden of proof. Don't you think that that's what this is really about; gender identity. I believe there is male and there is female. There are boys and there are girls. They are different. And I believe this decision by the Boy Scouts is a concession to cultural trends of non-binary sexual ideology. It's not about co-ed activities. Those are plentiful. It's about "girls" becoming "boy scouts".
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
The Boy Scouts had already announced their change to accept transboys into scouting. If this new policy was about gender identity blurring, it would seem unnecessary and superfluous in light of their previous policy change.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
No, I see it as a continuation of that very same decision. This decision more broadly ratifies this system of belief that blurs the distinctions in gender. I think that's without question. I believe that is how this decision has been perceived by both sides on the gender debate; some celebrating it, and some challenging it.
reply
5 ups
You may be right
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Or, the need to declare oneself the opposite of one's biological gender is the result of sexists refusing to accept people as they are. Since many want to shame a girl who has interests in activities and organizations traditionally considered masculine, it is easier to attempt to convince society that I AM a boy rather than to convince them to accept a girl who likes boyish things. At least that's my take on it. Gender should be irrelevant (except in regards to intimate relationships) but society has placed so much relevance on it, that how you identify sets which box society tries to push you into.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I think I see your point, but girls who like boyish activities aren't trying to say they are boys just to gain acceptance. That would seem to have the opposite effect and people would further shun them. Also, when you say "except in regards to intimate relationships," I was curious what you meant by that.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
"In regards to intimate relationships"
I was trying to find a non crude way of saying that, if a person likes dick, and you don't have a dick, don't expect a person to be interested just because you identify as a male (or other variations of such).
As far as I'm concerned behaviour and dress/make-up are personality traits and fashion choices and don't define your gender. If we didn't allow gender discrimination or accept gender stereotypes, gender would be irrelevant except for sexual relationships and reproduction.
reply
1 up
But if we never did, we wouldn't have had true progression. Progression is not trying to make the world "perfect" and tip the scales to the other side, causing a new form of prejudice. Progression is fighting evil and corruption, and if we never had any problems in society, we could've never knew how to fix them.
reply
4 ups
There shouldn't be a gender separation in scouting anymore. The only reason why there was to begin with is because the Girl Scouts were started in 1912 when women didn't have rights like we have today. I would like to think our concept of gender has evolved since then... not really sure if it has though.
reply
3 ups
Good point, male and female are the two genders. We can intermingle with each other and do activities. If people are thinking of turning boy scouts to also girls, they will have to consider the kids' view on it and realise it needs to change its name to fit.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Everything you believe in is backwards
reply
6 ups
:D
reply
6 ups, 3 replies
reply
6 ups, 3 replies
If you say so :) I fail to see how a particular social or political ideology is comparable to a neurochemical imbalance. I trust that since you're saying they are comparable, you have specialized training in the aforementioned field of neurochemistry and/or psychiatry? :) No? Then I guess that leaves the only remaining option, that you are a sad little Internet troll with no better use of your time :) that's too bad. I suggest maybe get a hobby, or find a more beneficial use of your limited time on this Earth :) read to blind kids :)
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Ever heard the expression; "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result?" Is that a scientific rule? An axiom? A truism? Is it a generalized colloquial expression, humorously suggesting that behavior so inexplicably stupid cannot be explained merely by having a learning disability, but that a more severe issue must be at the root?

I ask this, because the core doctrine of liberalism is forced egalitarianism, which has demonstrably failed every time it has been attempted, and therefore falls into the above humorously colloquial "definition" of insanity. So reason follows that liberalism is either a mental illness or just willful ignorance. I'd say the latter is less flattering than the former, but that's just me.

I respectfully invite you to step away from the Altar of the Opaquely Literal, and apply whatever offered footwear that is appropriately sized.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I do have a sense of humor, but ninja2016 is not here to be friendly and humorous, but rather to be a difficult asshole, so I have no problem repaying in kind.

If you say that forced egalitarianism has failed every time, that is false. Egalitarianism is about treating people equally. Women couldn't vote, so they demanded equality. Now they can vote. Black people were forced to use separate facilities, so they demanded equality. Now they don't have to use separate facilities. If you say that forced egalitarianism has always failed, you would have to say desegregation and women's suffrage are also failures.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Your past history with that particular user notwithstanding, I was merely pointing out that your tendency to kneel at the Altar of the Opaquely Literal when presented with right-leaning satire or humor is really beneath you.

In regard to forced egalitarianism, you and I are talking about two entirely different things, and I think you're smart enough to realize that. I find it amusing when you resort to false obtuseness to re-arrange my point rather than actually make the case for your own.

I cannot imagine that an rational, intelligent person such as yourself cannot see the clear distinction between Women's Suffrage and the Modern Feminist Movement, or between Desegregation and Affirmative Action. I am fully in favor of opportunity-based equality, but forced egalitarianism is associated with outcome-based equality, and that is something I soundly oppose. If you cannot (or will not) make the distinction between the two, then it's going to be difficult to have a conversation.
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
"...I was merely pointing out that your tendency to kneel at the Altar of the Opaquely Literal when presented with right-leaning satire or humor is really beneath you."

Except that he wasn't using satire or humor, but rather a silly insult. Satire implies at least a modicum of wit or cleverness. Accusing the entirety of your political opposition of being mentally ill is neither.

"I cannot imagine that an rational, intelligent person such as yourself cannot see the clear distinction between Women's Suffrage and the Modern Feminist Movement, or between Desegregation and Affirmative Action. I am fully in favor of opportunity-based equality, but forced egalitarianism is associated with outcome-based equality, and that is something I soundly oppose."

If you had said that the modern feminist movement or Affirmative Action were flawed, I would have agreed with you. But you didn't give any specific examples. You simply mentioned forced egalitarianism in general. I wasn't tying to be deliberately obtuse.
reply
1 up
I got examples. 1) The Women Suffrage were radical but they used it for male and female equality. 2) MFM is calling all men scum because they used to be on top of women and can't see that we have moved on. 3) Feminazis (Which is the MFM) Want the world of man eradicated and replaced with women, and they see men as obsolete. 4) The Women Suffrage produced the rights for women while not stripping main civil rights from men, but the Feminazis want a Matriarchy
reply
0 ups
"...entirety of your political opposition of being mentally ill is neither..."

No, this is highly reminiscent of the time I made a meme pointing out that the Latin word for "left" is "sinister" and you got all bent out of shape about it. I see my fair share of memes or comments implying that all conservatives are either Andrew Carnegie or Larry The Cable Guy, sometimes they're funny, sometimes they're stupid, but they're never absolutely literal. This just looks like a personal inability to take a joke when it hits too close to home.

"...wasn't tying to be deliberately obtuse..."

I was sufficiently specific. The distinction between forced egalitarianism and equality under the law are well-established, separate concepts. Unwittingly or intentionally, you've employed a misdirection debate tactic here that I've seen used many, many times (unfortunately often very effectively), and I'm experienced enough not to fall into the trap. For the home viewing audience, I'll distill it down to a mathematical formula:

Postulate: B=2
Counter: A=B, A=1, therefore B=1 (this is usually followed by a torrential flood of arguments in favor of A=1 while ignoring B=x completely, in the hope of suckering the other player into arguing against A=1, rather than against A=B which is the actual flaw in the counter)
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Octavia "the smartest truck driver alive" melody to the T.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I never claimed to be the smartest truck driver alive, and I'm also not sure what my profession has to do with this.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
You are probably not even employed, even though you can, you won't because liberalist cancer has spread to your brain
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Did you even read the comment you replied to? Yes, I am employed. I am a long haul truck driver. That is a job.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Oh no! I assumed your employment! SORRY! I AM SUCH BAD PERSON! BLAH!-Autistic screeching- MEEH -Even more ear **pe screeching- EEEEEEERR -100% Bass screeching-. (This is satire and mockery)
reply
1 up
???
reply
3 ups
So pseudo-intellectual=you.
reply
2 ups
kid friendlyised to suit a younger audience
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Declaring those you merely disagree with as mentally ill is a pathetic attempt to de-legitimize their opinions without actually arguing yours.
reply
2 ups
I've argued my side many times and grow weary of playing chess with liberal pigeons. So now it's bumper sticker retorts to save time. Besides, it's all they know... cliche's.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
It's not that, it's the fact that so many of these liberals can't accept that others don't agree with them and then attack and try to be as much as self righteous ass as possible is sort of narcissistic and sorta cancerous and ill on the free world
reply
1 up
Like many conservatives, as well :)
reply
10 ups, 1 reply
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
Lol. Funny! :)
reply
7 ups, 2 replies
reply
10 ups
:D
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
No. And we can just remove that.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Remove what?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Cookie sales.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
So you have enough influence with the Girl Scouts to remove the cookies?
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
See how my 6-upvote meme comment is below 4-UV comments? The conservative crybabies are out in force :p
4 ups
LOL, someone tried to play downvote fairy the day I came back.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I have the authority to make a joke. I'm asking you about authority because I don't know what point your trying to make or if you're a member of the girl scouts.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Girls don't need to be in the boy scouts, and vice versa.
4 ups
And how does "No. And we can just remove that." convey the point in your orange line post? There's no correlation.
reply
8 ups, 4 replies
I actually understand why a girl would prefer to join boy scouts. When my son was in cub scouts, they let my daughter participate in most activities. She liked it, so we looked into girl scouts. The activities were not comparable and they did not have a group with a meeting at a time or location that was doable for us.
reply
6 ups
We have women serving in the military along side with men. I don't see the problem. At least not yet.
reply
5 ups
Each troop is different. I'm a Sophmore in high school and still do girl scouts. My troop goes on all sorts of overnights and camping trips, make funny and great memories and we all have a lot of fun.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Why not just fix the girl scouts?
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
1. I don't have the time to run a girl scout troop (I can participate, but not run it).
2. It's easier to have both my kids in the same group (less running around).
3. Why have a separate group? Haven't we established that separate is inherently unequal?
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
1. You can petition to have the Girl Scouts change their ways instead of starting a troop. 2. You can have some other mom carpool. 3. Separate does not mean unequal. Also, the boy scouts are going to have change tradition and lose some members because parents don't trust teen boys and teen girls mixed together.

Also, girl scouts doesn't have to do any of this.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I'm going to start with 3. "Separate is inherently unequal" is the legal basis for de-segregation. It is an established legal fact.
2. There are no moms i can carpool with because they aren't impressed by girl scouts either (I do have friends with kids in boy scouts). Plus, I don't even have a car, I usually take the bus.
1. Petitions to non government organizations are typically what people do to make themselves feel better, but actually have no effect. They are in no way binding.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
3. "Separate is inherently unequal," inherently doesn't mean it can't be changed. Mercury is inherently dangerous, buy is safe in vaccines and breast milk.
2. Girl scouts will be impressive when the changes are made.
1.Then petition the government.
reply
4 ups, 4 replies
1. The girl scouts is not a government agency, the only thing the government can do is enforce laws, like the ones preventing discrimination, which is EXACTLY what happened in Boy scouts.
2. It could be, but why wait. Also different people, regardless of gender, have different interests. Some people would prefer the softer activities of the girl scouts (even some boys).
3. Separate is unequal cannot be "changed". How would you feel if it was captioned "So 'blacks' can to go to 'white' schools, wouldn't it be nice if there were black schools they could go to"? Hopefully, you're a decent human being and that would bother the shit out of you because you would realize that's racist as f**k. Well, i understand attitudes are still catching up, bit this meme is sexist as f**k.
(Also your mercury example is invalid. Mercury has not been "made safe". It is in such low quantities in certain natural items that the body can process it quicky enough to prevent harm. And mercury is not even used in vaccines anymore because it was recognized as a genuine concern and they found alternatives.)
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Just remember, ex-black male slaves were given the vote before rich white woman. Misogyny in this country Trumps racism...
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
And they faced much lynchings from it. How many women were lynched. Oh, right.
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
Who needs lynching when you can threaten to **pe some one into silence?
4 ups
Rape is the form of murder that keeps on giving. You might survive to live another day but the psychological scars, while they can fade, can also be crippling and they don't go away.
2 ups
Got any proof? It was a different time. Sex of all kinds was frowned upon. Couldn't have been as much used as lynching.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
No one gives a damn
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
3. Separate can be used in a way that isn't unequal.
2. It will be pretty much boy scouts for girls. So they would have to be impressed.
1. With enough petitions, we could just get the government involved.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
I'm done. You're an obvious sexist who wants to retain gender segregation for the sake of gender segregation. There is no reason for it, other than sexists want it. I have given several logical reasons, which you have in no way actually refuted. You're basically repeating "no it isn't" and expecting it to magically become true, but it isn't.

Question, were you bothered by my example, or are you racist as welk?
reply
2 ups
.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB871SVYMhI
reply
1 up, 2 replies
SHUT UP YOU LIBERAL SCUM! IF BOIS AND GALS ARE IN SCOUTS, IT WOULD MOVE ONTO LIBERALS GWANTING TOILETS TO BE "GENDERNEUTRAL" AND THEREFORE, KIDS WOULD EITHER BE REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE OR PERVERTS! CALLING SOMEONE A SEXIST BECAUSE THEY HAVE REASON IS A LIBERAL ACT AND ON MEMES, LIBERALS AIN'T WELCOME!
2 ups
Is that the slippery slope you're imagining here? Co-ed scouts eventually leads to perverted kids? Oh ye of little faith... Why does this have to be a negative thing? Why can't boys and girls learn together without it turning into an orgy? I mean they're spending 6 hrs a day, five days a week in school together and have been for decades. I'm seeing definite signs of hypocritical, puritanical Christian bullsh*t behind your belief system. Pull your head out of the dark ages and wake up. Females aren't the problem.
0 ups
First, I didn't put my figures in. Most of the people would be uncomfortable with it. At school, I had a pervert in my class, so I just said that people could be using it in perverted ways but it's only a small percentage. I just lost my cool, which I do rarely. Second, I don't think co-ed is bad, I think it's great, but there is a fine line between progression and unnecessary changes. I think females as a whole isn't a problem, it's the people who are in neo-feminism which is a problem. I believe we still should have some differences in gender, but I do want changes. Pay gaps and the like which affects wamen as a whole should be sorted out, but things so minor like scouts and toilets? Neo-feminism tries to mess with them without consideration for others. It's best for not all things to be "Genderneutral". And what I said, it was to stir up on purpose. Making a controversial statement in order for people to know what I'm saying is actually a political tactic, not a full thing.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Remember, white schools and black schools was a racist thing, but we have abolished that. I think it doesn't matter if you are a girl or a boy scout, it's not a hate crime to separate boys and girls in activities because boys are more likely to like activities more rough than girls and visa versa. I do think it's better to give a choice of activities instead of having boys doing girl activities. I think it's not really the fault on society but you are just trying to attack a perfectly okay system with claims of sexism.
reply
3 ups
More rough? Are they playing football or something? Are Girl Scouts sitting around cooking and knitting socks? What are these "girl activities " you're referring to?
reply
2 ups
i.imgflip.com/1xlpa7.jpg (click to show)
I'm not saying it's a "hate crime" but is is undeniably sexism.
reply
0 ups
"We got a real Smartass here. Give this triggered person a nobel peace prize" STHU NO ONE CARES
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I never thought you had children. I thought everymemer was a hopeless virgin
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Well, you're a memer. If you made that assumption, sorry about your sex life (or rather lack of).
reply
1 up
Thank you. I'm proud to be a virgin
reply
7 ups
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Feminists.
reply
14 ups
There are boys. And there are girls. It's not that hard, people. lol
reply
9 ups, 3 replies
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
Oh yes, and female with brains in a mostly male job is extremely simple, i tell you!
reply
5 ups
I'm so stoned.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups
reply
6 ups, 3 replies
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
lol! XD
reply
3 ups
That's hilarious.
reply
5 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
Lol.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
The Girl Scouts are reportedly pissed about this development.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
It's because GirlScouts is run by Femenazis.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
*Feminazi.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
You're right, Grammar Nazi. I thought my autocorrect looked off, but didn't bother double checking it.
reply
2 ups
reply
1 up
Well, for the first time in decades, they have a legitimate grievance.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/1xhl4p.jpg (click to show)
reply
4 ups
Lol!
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
10 ups
Haha! William Hung. ?She bangs! She bangs!?
reply
5 ups
reply
5 ups
Coming soon to Scouts...the pregnancy badge!
reply
4 ups
reply
5 ups
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
It's all about the dismantling of our society. The liberals are leading this fight.
Things like this happen when you still need to be a victim, but have nothing left to be victimized about.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Pseudo intellectual named octavia.

Truck driver genius lol
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
:D
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I wish I could just smile when I get trolled. I have a short temper and usually take the bait.
reply
3 ups
I take the bait, too, some of the time :3
reply
3 ups
It's true
reply
1 up
In this case, I would say "faux intellectual" is a bit more accurate.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Is it life threatening for girls to enter the boy scouts?
reply
5 ups
reply
3 ups
i.imgflip.com/1xjglc.jpg (click to show)
reply
3 ups
I don't care.
reply
3 ups
Boy scouts is WAY more fun than girl scouts. If I had chosen girl scouts when I was younger, I would probably have eaten all the cookies I was supposed to sell. Which also sounds pretty fun, come to think of it.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
4 ups, 3 replies
no, please stop. no one plays undertale anymore except for speedrunners. Please don't even try to fuse Sans and slenderman. Stop your vile trash.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
reply
3 ups
look at the freaking meme above my comment.
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Also, FOr your info it's not Sans fused with Slender. It's Nightmare Sans. Jeez it's snarks like you who don't like having fun. Undertale is a great game and people still play it cuz it's only 2 years old dumb ass. People still play the game, and expand on the fandom and AU's in which Nightmare Sans was created. So shut up, keep your b**ching to yourself, and move on.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
ok. You got me there. I had no Idea that it was... a unique Sans. I also had no idea that people actually still played that. Thank you for informing me of the knowledge I was ignorant of.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I can't tell if you're trying to trigger me with another fan made Sans.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
ok
reply
3 ups
Originally designed to prepare English boys to serve the Empire
reply
3 ups
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
reply
3 ups
2010's you so crazy.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
You know why it's called Boy Scouts? Because it's for bois.
Thicc Bois included
reply
0 ups
every kind of T H I C C
reply
2 ups
Too bad there isnt a girls scouts
reply
2 ups
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups
reply
2 ups
The funny thing is that the girlscout leadership immediately accused the boyscout leadership of scalping them for recruits since they have like a 5% participation or some abhorrently low number.
reply
2 ups
Maybe they wanted to join the Boy Scouts because of the cookie theives. Or is it just me who ambushes Girl Scouts and steals their cookies?
reply
3 ups
What really?! OmGina, people fight over the dumberest things
reply
2 ups
reply
2 ups
I FREAKING KNOW!!! I just heard last night, AND I WAS FURIOUS!
reply
3 ups
some people can be f**king stupid. i.imgflip.com/1x6k0j.gif (click to show)
reply
2 ups
i.imgflip.com/1xk6if.jpg (click to show)
reply
1 up
So I'm actually Girl Scout, you can't get angry at the Boy Scouts, they are called "Boy Scouts" for a reason. Let me remind you, this is my opinion, but I think it's kind of stupid that girls (and feminists) are getting butt-hurt over the fact the Boy Scouts (key word "Boy") are not letting in Girls. Once again, just my opinion.
reply
1 up
ikr
reply
1 up
New patch soon to be available to the girl members. The pregnancy patch.
reply
1 up
Liberalism, 50% hypocrisy, 50% intolerance, 0% Logic and Freedom of Speech
reply
0 ups
It's a little more complicated, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts do two different things. It's more like they're allowing girls so the girls can do Boy Scouts things.
Flip Settings
Face You Make Robert Downey Jr memeRe-caption this meme

Made by davidguitarhero 1 week ago

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
*GIRLS* CAN NOW BECOME "BOY SCOUTS" IF ONLY THERE WAS SOMETHING CALLED "GIRL SCOUTS" THEY COULD JOIN.
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back