It makes for a nice meal as long as you choose the right beer.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I had a few 'roo steaks back in the days when I was doing soldier things. There used to be a very good Australian restaurant in Toulouse where I was based, and I'd spend most of my paycheck there.
Then I realized my life was empty and I went back to regular cow.
ISIHAC's finest hour: the legendary countryside joke:MarcusAu wrote:
I still try to catch 'I'm sorry I haven't a clue' though whenever it is on - it has been running since 1972 (I think) and has two of the Goodies in it (if that means anything). They play pointless games - such as 'Mornington Crescent' , 'Radio Charades' or 'One Song to the Tune of Another':
[youtube][/youtube]
And of course you can go to youtube and use such things as clipconverter to convert the vids to mp3 files for your player.
Keating was certainly tall dark and handsome with a boyish grin.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:So, serious question for Brive and Keating:
Do you guys look anything like your avatars in real life?
DrokkIt wrote: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/should-y ... e=vicefbuk
What cultural ignorance! Nobody cooks fish and chips. That's the point. You buy fish and chips ready cooked.From above wrote: I don't assume that every white person is cooking fish and chips.
Woot?!? Close to 50?!? You read younger.Brive1987 wrote:Keating was certainly tall dark and handsome with a boyish grin.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:So, serious question for Brive and Keating:
Do you guys look anything like your avatars in real life?
And I'm about to hit 50 but I'm more Tom Cruise than bum.
If you want to leap down that rabbit hole,MarcusAu wrote:Jings - sometimes the more you know the less you want to.Shatterface wrote:Maybe they avoided the subject as it might lead to discussion of his support for NAMBLA?MarcusAu wrote:Also on the thumbnail above - the Santa Claus looking gentleman is Samuel 'Chip' Delany - who is black and gay - though for some reason these topics did not come up in his interview. (How times have changed).
Also, because 'Jones' is no doubt a reference to his body-part, his very name is an incitement to rape Diana !Hunt wrote:Caine is really on the warpath in PZ's J-Law thread. She's pressing the "paleface speak with fork tongue" routine pretty hard.
I suddenly had a thought: wonder how long it will be before SJWs realize that Indiana Jones is an anti-PC antihero, a guy who travels the world desecrating graves.
Also very racist : outside of the coast most fish n chip shops are owned by Chinese people now, the author should stop erasing the lives of poc.piginthecity wrote:DrokkIt wrote: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/should-y ... e=vicefbuk
What cultural ignorance! Nobody cooks fish and chips. That's the point. You buy fish and chips ready cooked.From above wrote: I don't assume that every white person is cooking fish and chips.
Being dumb as usual - what is the point in this?Brive1987 wrote:Yayayayayayay! :clap: :dance:
Tomorrow the world.
Umm, like "young and stupid" or "young and carefree". My calculated public/work persona is dry and serious with a hint of sarcasm coupled to,unpredictable flashes of professional passion.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Woot?!? Close to 50?!? You read younger.Brive1987 wrote:Keating was certainly tall dark and handsome with a boyish grin.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:So, serious question for Brive and Keating:
Do you guys look anything like your avatars in real life?
And I'm about to hit 50 but I'm more Tom Cruise than bum.
Tony the Queer Shoop's ex pillowfort now points to the Pit. That sentence should entail significant satisfaction.Malky wrote:Being dumb as usual - what is the point in this?Brive1987 wrote:Yayayayayayay! :clap: :dance:
Tomorrow the world.
That gnarly dude. I'm actually 93.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Woot?!? Close to 50?!? You read younger.Brive1987 wrote:Keating was certainly tall dark and handsome with a boyish grin.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:So, serious question for Brive and Keating:
Do you guys look anything like your avatars in real life?
And I'm about to hit 50 but I'm more Tom Cruise than bum.
I think the real horror Watson has for elevators is that it's the one place she forced to stand close to those horrible common people.
That holds for most TV-quizzes.MarcusAu wrote:is the concept of 'Quiz-o-tron' basically just a rip of of panel shows like 'Wait, wait...don't tell me?'
I've not really listened to either - but the basic formula seems the same -ie to outsource the content creation to talent that are paid little (or nothing).
What's a "platitud'?free thoughtpolice wrote:Drop the e and it's the same thing to me.
If white men pick a fight at christmas I'm sure it's "toxic masculinity".rayshul wrote:So the Arabs fight at a Christmas party, force their cultural shit on everyone else, one of them is crushing on her and making her awkward, and they get real emotional in the workplace.
Not sure what argument she's making but I think my takeaway is the opposite.
If films like the Godfather are halfway based in truth, Mafia dons also engage in hugging and kissing even when they've already made up their mind that one of us is leaving this place in a coffin.Kirbmarc wrote:Gillieil is confusing ritual, traditional greetings in the Arabic&Mediterrean world (hugging, kissing on cheeks) with the SJW idea that men need to be physically affectionate with each other in order to defeat their toxic masculinity (male grouphugs heal sexism!)
It's perfectly possible for people to follow ancient traditions of greeting between men that look too intimate in other parts of the world and too be rigidly conservative and extremely sexist. If Gilliel weren't so incredibly biased and (let's be brutally honest) an ignorant moron, she'd realize this, and be a little more concerned about the fight and less concerned about tut-tutting the Evil Misogynstic Westerners for not being so affectionate.
That's the nature of a cultural war: there are assumptions, there are barricades and there are casualties.ROBOKiTTY wrote:Why is it that so many people in the anti-SJW community nowadays conflate SJWs with 'liberals' and 'the left' (including, apparently, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both centre-right politicians), on the apparent assumption that 'the left' needs to police its more extreme members, but extremism on the right seems to be given a pass?
So paleoconservatives got nothing to do with neoconservatives, both of which have nothing to do with the more reasonable wing of the alt-right, and none of them has definitely got anything to do with neonazis and white supremacists. Outside of eerily similar voting patterns, they are distinct enough that no one outside of SJWs demands that they 'police' their own extremists.
And then I turn around, and right-wingers again lump 'liberals' and 'the left' into a pile with fascists, Nazis because hurr durr National Socialists, Trotskyists, Leninist, Stalinists, Maoists, North Korea, and SJWs. And when leftists defend themselves, saying they hold none of the regressive values, right-wingers point to SJWs and claim it's the entire left's fault that SJWs are the face of the left. And the anti-SJW community seems more than happy to lap it up, and so the definition of 'the regressive left' has crept from "a minority of the left in American terms holding regressive values" to "anything to the left of Milton Friedman, which is regressive in its entirety".
Not only does this credit the SJWs with more power than they actually have, it empowers the kind of regressive values that should be stamped out, e.g. anti-intellectualism (defund all universities cuz they're just SJW strongholds, amirite?), science denialism ('we have had enough of experts'), etc.
It still happens in Sicily, both the hugging and kissing and the Mafia (with less severed horses heads, though). And yes, it's perfectly possible to greet someone with three kisses on the cheeks and a hug and knife them in the back (even literally) seconds later.feathers wrote:If films like the Godfather are halfway based in truth, Mafia dons also engage in hugging and kissing even when they've already made up their mind that one of us is leaving this place in a coffin.Kirbmarc wrote:Gillieil is confusing ritual, traditional greetings in the Arabic&Mediterrean world (hugging, kissing on cheeks) with the SJW idea that men need to be physically affectionate with each other in order to defeat their toxic masculinity (male grouphugs heal sexism!)
It's perfectly possible for people to follow ancient traditions of greeting between men that look too intimate in other parts of the world and too be rigidly conservative and extremely sexist. If Gilliel weren't so incredibly biased and (let's be brutally honest) an ignorant moron, she'd realize this, and be a little more concerned about the fight and less concerned about tut-tutting the Evil Misogynstic Westerners for not being so affectionate.
I recall distinctly that people were fawning over the Make Quiz-o-Tron. And it did look like a neat project, but with very little practical value. I thought, who would have a real use for it. Well low and behold several months later Rebecca Watson is out hawking her Quiz-o-Tron event. I thought it was rather cheap of her to just gank the name and not even come up with a creative renaming of her own.Brive1987 wrote:Is that established or just "likely". Please consider before replying - a great (but ruined) story is a sad thing to behold.deLurch wrote:Make Magazine had an article on how to make your own quiz show buttons. Rebecca saw it, made it (or asked someone else to do the project for it), and Rebecca in her finite sense of creativity & originality called her show the same exact thing as the Makezine project. "Quiz-o-tron."MarcusAu wrote:For the Americans here - just wondering..
is the concept of 'Quiz-o-tron' basically just a rip of of panel shows like 'Wait, wait...don't tell me?'
I've not really listened to either - but the basic formula seems the same -ie to outsource the content creation to talent that are paid little (or nothing).
If so - I'm not sure that it will play so well at a comedy festival - where it may been seen as too 'high brow' in the vein of NPR or 'Harvard Lampoon' no matter how well executed it is.
http://makezine.com/2011/01/15/quiz-o-t ... uiz-locko/
There were not rules for the game in the project.
It is just a generic quiz show format with "celebrities" where the people she picks as contestants provide the personality & entertainment, and she provides the framework and prompts (quiz questions) to get the ball rolling. And with all "celebrity" contests, the score & points don't really matter.
Rebecca's talent here is in finding other more talented people to entertain crowds and do the work for her, hopefully for free while she earns a buck.
And while I considered it incredibly highly likely, and nearly impossible not to be a coincidence, about a year or so down the road there was an interview with her that asked how she started quiz-o-tron and she specifically mentioned finding the project in a magazine and her taking it from there.This intro section includes a picture of the completed system that I dubbed the “Quiz-O-Tron 3000” (QT3K for short).
Reducing immigration and introducing regulated borders isn't something I'm against. What I'm against is throwing out those who are already integrated.Steersman wrote: Apropos of "diversity + proximity" and shared values, a recent post from Douglas Murray at The Times on "Immigrant oaths can’t work when integration already looks doomed" (no reference that I saw to pissing on the Quran though ...). A salient quote or two:But seems less an issue of a "country so self-confessedly bad at integrating people" than with the flat fact of the matter that "Islam is flatly incompatible with the establishment and maintenance of the equal individual rights and liberties of a liberal, democratic, secular state". And it seems that only populists like those who spearheaded Brexit, and leaders like Trump, Wilders, and Le Pen, who are willing to face that fact, and to respond accordingly.Douglas Murray wrote:It is 15 years since race riots broke out in the towns of Oldham, Bradford and Burnley. Back then, in 2001, a Labour government commissioned a report into the causes of the violence within these deeply divided communities. The report by Ted Cantle, presented to home secretary David Blunkett, concluded that some communities in Britain lived “parallel lives”. One solution suggested by the author was for new migrants to swear an oath of loyalty to Britain. ....
In recent years I have seen at first-hand the bifurcated societies identified by Cantle and Casey — not just in the north of England but across our continent. The phenomenon Casey describes is at least as evident in Sweden, Germany and France. ....
In all of our countries there is a recognition of the extent of such problems. But there is also a terrorised silence over the causes, let alone answers, to the situation we have brought upon ourselves. As earlier immigration has shown, when movement is slow and involves similar groups, integration is achievable. At recent European rates there is almost no chance. The larger the communities the harder it is to break up the parallel lives created. And not just because newcomers stick together, but because the average parent thinks twice before sending their child to a school made up entirely of Somalis and Afghans.
Strangely, after each effort to draw back the curtains on this situation, a minority persists in their contrary effort to yank the curtains closed again. Before the report was even released, the Tory peer Sayeeda Warsi tried to undermine Casey by declaring that the sections on Muslim women showed an “empire strikes back” mindset. The Muslim Council of Britain announced that Casey had not considered the extent to which “white people” were responsible for the lack of integration in Britain while retired Muslim police chief Dal Babu commented critically about the number of times “Muslim” appeared in the report compared with the word “Jew”.
Such deflection and distraction have become all too familiar. ....
The question is what, if anything, can be done. Whenever any government representative has asked me about this I have given the same answer: start by considering that this might not work — that the scale of immigration over recent years may have destroyed any hope of a cohesive society in the future. “But it has to work,” they say. That presumption is a large part of the problem.
Were government to absorb rather than flick through reports such as Casey’s it would see that the obvious conclusion is to stop or dramatically slow the flow of people. What is the purpose of continuing to bring hundreds of thousands of people each year into a country that is so self-confessedly bad at integrating people? Even if Britain installed a citizenship oath, what would we do with those who refused to take it, took it with fingers crossed or took it and then broke it? ....
The original creator wroteBrive1987 wrote:I see Watson originally called it Quiz-o-tron 9000.
I guess it was 3x as good as the original name she ripped off.
http://opoikiyo.blogspot.com.au/2014/09 ... slate.html
I don't really get the numbers for the original 3000 nor the ripoff 9k
I strongly suspect he was a fan of Myster Science Theater 3000, which is frequently abbreviated as MST3K.This intro section includes a picture of the completed system that I dubbed the “Quiz-O-Tron 3000” (QT3K for short).
The Bernie Bros were cooked up by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. It's an example of the fake news that Clinton is crying about now. The irony is lost on her.Kirbmarc wrote: Sanders is, to a larger extent, an anti-SJW on the "left". He's not too overly concerned with identity politics, he's not overly friendly with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States (as the foreign policy-minded SJWs tend to be to a fault), he's not very pro-censorship. There's a reason why the SJW rejected him and his supporters as "Bernie Bros", a.k.a. secret white supremacist and sexist shitlords ( even Sanders himself has been called a white supremacist :lol: ).
What do you mean by integrated? Isn't the point that most are not integrated? They are however well established.Kirbmarc wrote: Reducing immigration and introducing regulated borders isn't something I'm against. What I'm against is throwing out those who are already integrated.
It's easier to deal with integrating those already in the country without dealing with new arrivals in droves.VickyCaramel wrote:What do you mean by integrated? Isn't the point that most are not integrated? They are however well established.Kirbmarc wrote: Reducing immigration and introducing regulated borders isn't something I'm against. What I'm against is throwing out those who are already integrated.
It should also be pointed out that here is evidence that the process of integration is being reversed.
But by their fathers being absent they ARE connected to black culture in the US.Kirbmarc wrote:
I remember when she was inadvertently racist when she was worried that half-black Germans who have black fathers living in the US felt too much integrated in German culture and were "isolated from black culture in the US" and this was somehow compromising their "true identity" (because all black people should know each other?). She seems like someone who hasn't spent a lot of time abroad and hasn't studied that much beyond reading radfem and SJ literature. A "latte liberal", if you want.
The DNC and the Clinton campaign were dominated by card-carrying SJWs. They considered a nobody and a screwup (even according to her SJW friends) like Brianna Wu to be someone worth talking to, and Clinton even denounced the Pepe the Frog meme as a nazi plot. She wasn't a "left-wing" candidate, she was a corporate candidate who use SJ rhetoric and employed SJWs to paint herself as a paladin of progressivism.katamari Damassi wrote:The Bernie Bros were cooked up by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. It's an example of the fake news that Clinton is crying about now. The irony is lost on her.Kirbmarc wrote: Sanders is, to a larger extent, an anti-SJW on the "left". He's not too overly concerned with identity politics, he's not overly friendly with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States (as the foreign policy-minded SJWs tend to be to a fault), he's not very pro-censorship. There's a reason why the SJW rejected him and his supporters as "Bernie Bros", a.k.a. secret white supremacist and sexist shitlords ( even Sanders himself has been called a white supremacist :lol: ).
Gezellligheid.Shatterface wrote:What the fuck is 'hygge'?
http://www.vomzi.com/wp-content/uploads ... if-551.gifkatamari Damassi wrote:But by their fathers being absent they ARE connected to black culture in the US.Kirbmarc wrote:
I remember when she was inadvertently racist when she was worried that half-black Germans who have black fathers living in the US felt too much integrated in German culture and were "isolated from black culture in the US" and this was somehow compromising their "true identity" (because all black people should know each other?). She seems like someone who hasn't spent a lot of time abroad and hasn't studied that much beyond reading radfem and SJ literature. A "latte liberal", if you want.
That is the catch 22. There is no way to single out people without compromising Liberal principles. The only way to do it is to mark Islam as "enemies of the state" in which case you might as well target them all. If you recognise the problem for what it is, why not?Kirbmarc wrote:It's easier to deal with integrating those already in the country without dealing with new arrivals in droves.VickyCaramel wrote:What do you mean by integrated? Isn't the point that most are not integrated? They are however well established.Kirbmarc wrote: Reducing immigration and introducing regulated borders isn't something I'm against. What I'm against is throwing out those who are already integrated.
It should also be pointed out that here is evidence that the process of integration is being reversed.
It's also easy to single out people who are promoting reversal of integration if we don't open the floodgates.
It's not the only way to do it. What you have to mark as "seditious" is a call to disestablish liberal democracy and to undermine liberal democratic institutions.VickyCaramel wrote:That is the catch 22. There is no way to single out people without compromising Liberal principles. The only way to do it is to mark Islam as "enemies of the state" in which case you might as well target them all. If you recognise the problem for what it is, why not?
So? Insularity is never a good idea, no matter the harm done. I don't think that you can have parallel states in a liberal democracy. I don't want a Jewish tribunal more than I want a muslim tribunal. If you leave in a society you should accept the institutions of that society, and institutions must be neutral. If you don't like that and wish to establish a theocracy, tough luck.And I think this is part of the problem, that you insist on looking at the enemy as individuals when we are confronted by an ideology.
By-the-by, when you start looking at policies which would target Muslim communities, you start to see that others would get caught in the net, such as the Jewish community which was mentioned a couple of pages back. Although they don't do anyone any harm, they are a rapidly growing community which contributes next to nothing, 70% of them are on welfare because they will not and cannot work.
Yes, the progressives has done this. There's no need to carry on that way.There are some fundamental assumptions that is made by classical liberalism which people are beginning to question. Liberalism grants the freedom to groups to act illiberally and work against Liberalism. The massive irony here is that rather than restrict freedoms to prevent this, the progressives have been restricting our freedoms in order to allow it.
That's because "target islam" now means everything from rightfully mocking islam and criticizing it to setting muslims on fire. You can thank the progressives and their idiotic, insane ideas like "microaggression", "feelings matter" and "words hurt more than stones" for that. Time to set the course back to sanity. "Burn it all" is never a good idea.People are beginning to think, "I'm told it's illiberal to target Islam, and to make sure I don't say it they are taking away my freedom of speach.... burn it down. Fuck it all".
Limiting immigration, creating high standards for citizenship and asking people to accept and work within the structures of a liberal democracy isn't "fascism", even though the SJWs call it this way.I can tell you this, it will never end in civil war. We will never let it get that far, we will vote in parties who will look distinctly fascist in many policy areas. I don't think there can be much doubt that is the direction we are moving in. It's time to stop fiddling around the edges of the problem and take some decisive action.
This is why 'regressive' is so apt for Gilliel and her kind: what she writes there is is pure 'noble savage' bullshit. 'I also think that Western men could learn a lot from Arab men. They care a lot for each other. They will hug and kiss and do emotional labour for each other. When somebody is hurt they will be all tender and soft towards that person.' Yes, Gil, you dozy great pig, gaze upon your dusky charges, and observe with an indulgent smile at how uncorrupted they are by our Western masculine mores - just like the sentimental Victorian missionary you really are.free thoughtpolice wrote:Gilliel has been mentoring migrant/refugee types for a while. They are so much nicer than German men.Argh, people (if you’re also reading at Affinity, you’ll get a double post here)
On Tuesday we had our christmas party at work. Now, our students (mostly young men from Syria and Iraq) weren’t in a particularly serene mood and quickly replaced our christmas music (and I had even made a playlist of Arabic christmas music sung by a popular Syrian singer!) with their pop music and started dancing.
And yes, there was a fight, or an almost fight. That stuff happens. It’s a mixture probably of having young men who are all by themselves, cultural factors and I suppose also a lot of trauma: when they’re triggered and feel like they’re in a situation again where they were scared and helpless, they explode. But the rest of them will always interfere, separate the fighters, calm them and then they will all hug and kiss and be the best friends again*.
Anyway, the situation was quickly under control again and everybody celebrated until we all cleaned up again. I think we all went out there thinking it was a good day, albeit with some chaos and a few critical moments, and glad they had some fun.
Apparently, from what the caretaker told the facility manager (who wasn’t there), it was pure chaos and those “three poor women couldn’t deal with all that”. My colleague kept wondering who those “three poor women” were until I told her “he means us”. Yeah, let’s talk about totally non-sexist western men again.
*This is a different point but I think worth mentioning: Not only can Arab men learn some new things about the relationships between men and women and everybody else, I also think that Western men could learn a lot from Arab men. They care a lot for each other. They will hug and kiss and do emotional labour for each other. When somebody is hurt they will be all tender and soft towards that person.
I wrote this the other day, after being kind of annoyed and feeling that the big issue is that my "quadrant" of the political spectrum has very little support.ROBOKiTTY wrote:Why is it that so many people in the anti-SJW community nowadays conflate SJWs with 'liberals' and 'the left' (including, apparently, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both centre-right politicians), on the apparent assumption that 'the left' needs to police its more extreme members, but extremism on the right seems to be given a pass?
So paleoconservatives got nothing to do with neoconservatives, both of which have nothing to do with the more reasonable wing of the alt-right, and none of them has definitely got anything to do with neonazis and white supremacists. Outside of eerily similar voting patterns, they are distinct enough that no one outside of SJWs demands that they 'police' their own extremists.
And then I turn around, and right-wingers again lump 'liberals' and 'the left' into a pile with fascists, Nazis because hurr durr National Socialists, Trotskyists, Leninist, Stalinists, Maoists, North Korea, and SJWs. And when leftists defend themselves, saying they hold none of the regressive values, right-wingers point to SJWs and claim it's the entire left's fault that SJWs are the face of the left. And the anti-SJW community seems more than happy to lap it up, and so the definition of 'the regressive left' has crept from "a minority of the left in American terms holding regressive values" to "anything to the left of Milton Friedman, which is regressive in its entirety".
Not only does this credit the SJWs with more power than they actually have, it empowers the kind of regressive values that should be stamped out, e.g. anti-intellectualism (defund all universities cuz they're just SJW strongholds, amirite?), science denialism ('we have had enough of experts'), etc.
Well there must be something in it if it made the papers.DW Adams wrote:So the Morris NorthStar is about to out PZ as a rapist in its next issue, and PZ blames "slymers, Michael Nugent and Mike Cernovich."
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... atch-list/
Feel free to Archive link this, I'm too lazy.
Stupid arse beard is also basing the whole thing on that fact that it's only a rumoured article. I'd recommend that the dozy fucker wait until something actually happens in print, but then again, Peez does have a habit of getting carried away with rumours.Shatterface wrote:Well there must be something in it if it made the papers.DW Adams wrote:So the Morris NorthStar is about to out PZ as a rapist in its next issue, and PZ blames "slymers, Michael Nugent and Mike Cernovich."
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... atch-list/
Feel free to Archive link this, I'm too lazy.
I don't know who Cernovich is but neither the Pit nor Nugent has claimed that Myeres is a rapist.
I hope the NorthStar picks up on Oggie's confession.
Trying to get ahead of it again, poor 'lil fellow. I would bet that it is actually making him nervous, what with his many versions of the "truth."Tigzy wrote:Stupid arse beard is also basing the whole thing on that fact that it's only a rumoured article. I'd recommend that the dozy fucker wait until something actually happens in print, but then again, Peez does have a habit of getting carried away with rumours.Shatterface wrote:Well there must be something in it if it made the papers.DW Adams wrote:So the Morris NorthStar is about to out PZ as a rapist in its next issue, and PZ blames "slymers, Michael Nugent and Mike Cernovich."
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... atch-list/
Feel free to Archive link this, I'm too lazy.
I don't know who Cernovich is but neither the Pit nor Nugent has claimed that Myeres is a rapist.
I hope the NorthStar picks up on Oggie's confession.
I looked. It says nothing. The horde exhibit a surprising degree of class-envy. Not worth archiving.DW Adams wrote:So the Morris NorthStar is about to out PZ as a rapist in its next issue, and PZ blames "slymers, Michael Nugent and Mike Cernovich."
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... atch-list/
Feel free to Archive link this, I'm too lazy.
Bolding mine.Shatterface wrote:Well there must be something in it if it made the papers.DW Adams wrote:So the Morris NorthStar is about to out PZ as a rapist in its next issue, and PZ blames "slymers, Michael Nugent and Mike Cernovich."
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... atch-list/
Feel free to Archive link this, I'm too lazy.
I don't know who Cernovich is but neither the Pit nor Nugent has claimed that Myeres is a rapist.
I hope the NorthStar picks up on Oggie's confession.
The ortho Jewish community, as opposed to the general Jewish population, although rapidly growing, is small potatos in terms of numbers compared to Muslim communities. The effects of their insularity are internal if one leaves aside economic issues, which are not as clear cut as you are suggesting.as they suffer far, far less from some of the the social/criminal problems prevalent amongst the general population. The last point tends to counter the likelihood of Jews being caught up in protective immigration policies. Playing Borg Collective a la Islam, is also anathema to them given their insistence on purity. They aren't even a threat ti the freedoms of liberal Jews. As for the more secular Jewry, they arguably contribute a disproportionate amount to the culture and industry of the nation.VickyCaramel wrote:
That is the catch 22. There is no way to single out people without compromising Liberal principles. The only way to do it is to mark Islam as "enemies of the state" in which case you might as well target them all. If you recognise the problem for what it is, why not?
And I think this is part of the problem, that you insist on looking at the enemy as individuals when we are confronted by an ideology.
By-the-by, when you start looking at policies which would target Muslim communities, you start to see that others would get caught in the net, such as the Jewish community which was mentioned a couple of pages back. Although they don't do anyone any harm, they are a rapidly growing community which contributes next to nothing, 70% of them are on welfare because they will not and cannot work.
There are some fundamental assumptions that is made by classical liberalism which people are beginning to question. Liberalism grants the freedom to groups to act illiberally and work against Liberalism. The massive irony here is that rather than restrict freedoms to prevent this, the progressives have been restricting our freedoms in order to allow it.
People are beginning to think, "I'm told it's illiberal to target Islam, and to make sure I don't say it they are taking away my freedom of speach.... burn it down. Fuck it all".
I can tell you this, it will never end in civil war. We will never let it get that far, we will vote in parties who will look distinctly fascist in many policy areas. I don't think there can be much doubt that is the direction we are moving in. It's time to stop fiddling around the edges of the problem and take some decisive action.
https://areomagazine.com/2016/12/08/pet ... versities/Disciplines such as gender studies don’t have a dialectic. They’re not truth seeking enterprises. They think they’ve already found they truth and exist to indoctrinate students. There is no dialectic at the core of those disciplines like there is in philosophy. And there are profoundly negative consequences for peoples’ views of reality — it untethers them from what’s real.
A friend of mine is a physician and she told me an interesting story. She had a guy to come in to see her who was born biologically female who transitioned to male. Who by every indication looked like a male — beard, the whole thing. And he came in because he had a yeast infection.
Now you can go around denying reality all you want, but isn’t it funny that we only deny reality in regard to some things and not other things. Why don’t people deny reality in terms of the value of a currency? Why don’t people walk into a bank with a $10 bill and tell them that in their reality it equals 15 $5 dollar bills? Because people don’t believe this stuff. That’s why. This is not complicated. You just have to be honest. Don’t barter truth for hope.
One of the first orders of business is that we need to completely defund gender studies departments. These places are toxic cesspools of misinformation pumping out dangerous, dangerous nonsense.
I don’t know how much more can be done to show that these “disciplines” are really a situation in which the emperor has no clothes. And that’s putting it charitably.
I also hope the North Star picks up on PZ's public support of a child rapist. Their article about PZ being a rapist writes itself; they just need to copy and paste his own words.Eskarina wrote:Bolding mine.Shatterface wrote:Well there must be something in it if it made the papers.DW Adams wrote:So the Morris NorthStar is about to out PZ as a rapist in its next issue, and PZ blames "slymers, Michael Nugent and Mike Cernovich."
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... atch-list/
Feel free to Archive link this, I'm too lazy.
I don't know who Cernovich is but neither the Pit nor Nugent has claimed that Myeres is a rapist.
I hope the NorthStar picks up on Oggie's confession.
Au contraire, it was Peasy himself who claimed that Nugent's comment section was a haven for rapists (i.e. the 'pitters who posted there).
The teacher was fired.In other words, he said, in a pluralistic democracy, there’s often “a difference between people’s private morality and the law.
“I find abortion to be wrong,” he said, as another illustration of this gap, “but the law is often different from our personal opinions.”
That was it, the teacher said. “It was just a quick exemplar, nothing more. And we moved on.”
A little later, the class had a five-minute break, and when it resumed, several students didn’t return, among them a popular young woman who had gone to an administrator to complain that what the teacher said had “triggered” her such that she felt “unsafe” and that, in any case, he had no right to an opinion on the subject of abortion because he was a man.
The school, for the record, is a witheringly progressive one.
Before classes even started last fall, teachers underwent serious “gender training” given by QMUNITY, an organization for LGBTQQ2S (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning and two-spirit) people. Teachers were told in no uncertain terms, for instance, that “no one is 100-per-cent male or female” and that everyone is somewhere on the “gender spectrum.”
Unsurprisingly, students at the school, where $30,000-a-year tuition buys small classes, regularly say “I’m so triggered” and are allowed to walk out of class.
What happened to the teacher over the ensuing few days sounds like something out of the Cultural Revolution in Mao’s China, where people were subjected to what were known as ideological struggle sessions, forced to “confess” to various imagined sins before large crowds, and roundly denounced.
All very good points, and I agree.Karmakin wrote:
I wrote this the other day, after being kind of annoyed and feeling that the big issue is that my "quadrant" of the political spectrum has very little support.
Or in short, the answer to your question is that SJW's and the left are equated because the non/anti-authoritarian left is basically invisible.
