Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[Tony Parsehole]

In all seriousness though I read the first Hunger Games book and thought it was surprisingly good.
Carry on.

[Tony Parsehole]

Battle Royale has not aged well at all. The actor's death scene acting is totes cringe.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Riker was galaxo-sexual. He'd fuck anything. He once fucked a 'Pat' from a unisexual 'Pat' species who had eggs for babies. Hell, if Riker went to Skepchickcon, he'd probably even fuck Surly Amy.

No way. Captain Kirk wouldn't even fuck Surly Amy. I don't even think Captain Jack Harkness would touch her either!

Captain Janeway would fuck Surly Amy, if that meant to cause pain and suffering to her crew.

Captain Janeway would allow Surly Amy to serve on the crew, even after Amy tried to blow up the ship in Episode 7, Season II.

No, wait ... that's Melody Hensley and Captain Ron Lindsay.

[comhcinc]

Of course I believe that someone could report what Myers himself has written on this topic, and the university can do whatever they please with that report. What leads you to believe otherwise?

I am taking you at your word. Since I am taking you at your word my opinion of you is that you are a stupid sumbitch.

You seem to be suggesting that a person's own words cannot or should not be used as the basis for filing a report, but perhaps I am misunderstanding what you meant.

I am actually suggest that.

Maybe I misunderstood what some others have written on the matter as well, and nobody genuinely believes there was any legitimate wrong-doing on Myers' part. In which case, my mistake, I guess I am a stupid sumabitch then.

From what he has written on the subject it does sound like it wasn't handled by the book but that is just hearsay and yes, yes you are.

[Lsuoma]

I'm in moderation at the Nuge for this. I don't know why.

That happens. You probably used a word he'd going to review before he lets it through.

FWIW, he's never failed to let any of my moderated posts through. But he checks because I quote people and they use bad words like "demented fuckwit."

I think I saw the word "lying" in your post. That'll do it, IIRC.

[comhcinc]

Battle Royale has not aged well at all. The actor's death scene acting is totes cringe.

Some of the scenes are pretty cringe worthy but to me it just adds to the fun.

Much better that watching moody teenage girl anst and over the top special effects.

I mean why not use the tech that is used in the battle dome to help produce more food so everyone is happy?

[Tribble]

I thought Jennifer Lawrence was pretty bad in the first half of Catching Fire, which surprised me because I've liked her in everything else I've seen her in. But she redeemed herself in the second half when she could let her emotions flow

*
NOT REALLY A SPOILER

In Catching Fire, Katniss is not given much to do other than be confused and shell-shocked. The book gave more of an explanation of what was going on in her head, which wasn't presented properly in the film. Can't blame The Goddess Jennifer for that.

Yeah, there were two major things going on in the first half of the book that really didn't translate into a quality cinematic experience. One was the District Tour and how some districts were rebelling. There was also a LOT of internal Katniss dialogue as well as a lot of things going on with her family, the community-at-large and even some stuff with Haymitch, as well.

[Tony Parsehole]

Battle Royale has not aged well at all. The actor's death scene acting is totes cringe.

Some of the scenes are pretty cringe worthy but to me it just adds to the fun.

Much better that watching moody teenage girl anst and over the top special effects.

I mean why not use the tech that is used in the battle dome to help produce more food so everyone is happy?

Why not use your face to help produce food so everyone is happy?

[Kirbmarc]

I mean why not use the tech that is used in the battle dome to help produce more food so everyone is happy?

I guess that happens for the same reasons why we don't all sell our televisions, laptops and cell phones and send the money to someone who will save some starving children in Africa.

[CuntajusRationality]

That's bullshit. If you are not advocating someone uses that link why post it. That is the game they play. Don't go down to their level.

Really I hate this type of bullshit. You want to waste everyones time sending bullshit anon reports go ahead but don't ask me to do to. (oh I'm sorry you don't want that to happen at all wink wink)

By the way, I find your response to my comment quite interesting, considering that you earlier posted that you had written a letter to CFI about Hensley's behavior. I'm sure there is some distinction(s) that allows you to feel that what you did was fine whereas what I did was bullshit, but from my vantage point that looks and sounds a lot like "it's okay when I do it."

viewtopic.php?p=177514#p177514 (post 4326)

I did write a letter to her superiors about her behavior. I have in the past, as some of you might have, donated to the CFI. I believe that does give me some say in this matter. Even if I haven't donated this organization does attempt to speak for the a/s community. As such I think it is important that they know that some of us fear that Hensley's actions hurt the mission of the CFL:

Yeah there is a big fucking distinction. I used my name. It had my full name, address, and phone number on it. My letter was about her online behavior which I witnessed first hand.

That is a big difference for your anonymous reporting page.

First, there is no requirement to remain anonymous, and so there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from sharing your name and contact information if you choose to do so; just like there was nothing stopping you from sending an anonymous letter to CFI if you had chosen to do that instead. In other words, the decision to remain anonymous is entirely in the hands of the one making the report, whether we are talking about writing a letter to CFI or reporting a university violation. I don't see how you can justify your disapproval of what I posted merely because one is afforded the option of anonymity, when you were afforded that same option in your letter to CFI.

If you want to make the case that anonymous reports are bad but non-anonymous reports are ok, well then you could have been a little more clear about that.

As to you reporting what you witnessed first hand, I never suggested nor implied anything different. We all saw what Myers himself has written on this topic, and I would expect that, if someone did make a report, that Myers' own words would form the basis and justification for said report.

[CuntajusRationality]

Just my opinion, but I started finding the Ogvorbis and Peezus rape stories tedious about the fifth the time they came up here. And now that we're in the vicinity of round 20, excruciatingly so. I actually turned off the pit for a while about a month ago when there was a volley of Ogvorbis related posts, and now we're getting both at the same time. I understand that the main issue regarding these is FTB hypocrisy, and that this latest outcropping started with MN's post. Maybe some people find it interesting. But I just want to bang my head on my desk when it comes up.

Agreed. The dead horse has been flogged down to its bones now. There's no new information coming in on it, so it feels very repetitious.

Apologies for rehashing topics that you've been through before. I'll be happy to either drop the point or take it to a separate thread somewhere if comhcinc or anyone else would like to continue the discussion.

[pajh]

The Hunger Games confuses the shit out of me. Fine it's a dystopian future where kids between 12 & 18 have to kill each other in a combat spectacle - yes I get that, but conveniently a large percentage of these CHILDREN are not the right sort so that our heroes and heroines can kill them with little remorse, and as "luck" would have it the "not the right sort" competitors manage to kill off all the "nice" children before they too die horribly at the hands of our heroine and hero.

fuck me bu I can't see how anyone over the age of 12 could find anything interesting in such imbecilic and contrived crap.

I like a good action movie where kids can slaughter kids for my enjoyment - as long as the one I consider "pure, righteous and virginal wins" - really?

[comhcinc]

Battle Royale has not aged well at all. The actor's death scene acting is totes cringe.

Some of the scenes are pretty cringe worthy but to me it just adds to the fun.

Much better that watching moody teenage girl anst and over the top special effects.

I mean why not use the tech that is used in the battle dome to help produce more food so everyone is happy?

Why not use your face to help produce food so everyone is happy?

I do. I grow potatoes in my beard.

I mean why not use the tech that is used in the battle dome to help produce more food so everyone is happy?

I guess that happens for the same reasons why we don't all sell our televisions, laptops and cell phones and send the money to someone who will save some starving children in Africa.

If I only used those things once a year I might. But I didn't mean use the battle dome grow food. I mean use the technology that they have in the battle dome to grow food. I mean those people have figured out how to do total environmental control. That's pretty advanced.

[CuntajusRationality]

Of course I believe that someone could report what Myers himself has written on this topic, and the university can do whatever they please with that report. What leads you to believe otherwise?

I am taking you at your word. Since I am taking you at your word my opinion of you is that you are a stupid sumbitch.

You seem to be suggesting that a person's own words cannot or should not be used as the basis for filing a report, but perhaps I am misunderstanding what you meant.

I am actually suggest that.

Maybe I misunderstood what some others have written on the matter as well, and nobody genuinely believes there was any legitimate wrong-doing on Myers' part. In which case, my mistake, I guess I am a stupid sumabitch then.

From what he has written on the subject it does sound like it wasn't handled by the book but that is just hearsay and yes, yes you are.

I'll accept the label of stupid sumabitch, but only on the condition that you accept the label of "rationalizing hypocrite" until such time as you repent for the letter you sent to CFI in regards to one of their employees (or admit you were wrong to call bullshit on me). Seems fair enough, right?

[Tribble]

To put it another way, Peeta is trying to work his way out of the Nice Guy Zone.

I got the impression Gale was also in the friend zone because Katniss didn't want to get married or have children. Gale was working out by kissing her in the woods and promising her he'd support her family while she was in the games and otherwise using his hunky masculine sex appeal to woo her.

[Tribble]

I'm in moderation at the Nuge for this. I don't know why.

That happens. You probably used a word he'd going to review before he lets it through.

FWIW, he's never failed to let any of my moderated posts through. But he checks because I quote people and they use bad words like "demented fuckwit."

I think I saw the word "lying" in your post. That'll do it, IIRC.

Yes, that's one that's got me before.

[katamari Damassi]

The Hunger Games confuses the shit out of me. Fine it's a dystopian future where kids between 12 & 18 have to kill each other in a combat spectacle - yes I get that, but conveniently a large percentage of these CHILDREN are not the right sort so that our heroes and heroines can kill them with little remorse, and as "luck" would have it the "not the right sort" competitors manage to kill off all the "nice" children before they too die horribly at the hands of our heroine and hero.

fuck me bu I can't see how anyone over the age of 12 could find anything interesting in such imbecilic and contrived crap.

I like a good action movie where kids can slaughter kids for my enjoyment - as long as the one I consider "pure, righteous and virginal wins" - really?

That's the primary thing that bothered me about the movie. Also I didn't get the mourning for Rue-the little she knew for approximately 20 minutes. And what was with those exploding trees and holographic dog things? I thought the kids were supposed to kill each other but the kids were more in danger from the crew trying to wrangle them.

[comhcinc]

First, there is no requirement to remain anonymous, and so there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from sharing your name and contact information if you choose to do so; just like there was nothing stopping you from sending an anonymous letter to CFI if you had chosen to do that instead. In other words, the decision to remain anonymous is entirely in the hands of the one making the report, whether we are talking about writing a letter to CFI or reporting a university violation. I don't see how you can justify your disapproval of what I posted merely because one is afforded the option of anonymity, when you were afforded that same option in your letter to CFI.

If you want to make the case that anonymous reports are bad but non-anonymous reports are ok, well then you could have been a little more clear about that.

As to you reporting what you witnessed first hand, I never suggested nor implied anything different. We all saw what Myers himself has written on this topic, and I would expect that, if someone did make a report, that Myers' own words would form the basis and justification for said report.

I am going to explain this out and then I am dropping it. When PZ gets done reading the latest tentacle porn (comics come out on Wednesdays) and hops on his laptop to check the pit, he will see you post saying "hey everyone look you can report bad things PZ did anonymously!". He is going to take that in the most unflattering light (as honestly I am as well), and he is going to start claiming that the pit is encouraging people to file false reports anonymously about him.

You say you don't mean that and I am taking you at your word.

Now the other part. Unless you were involved in the event that PZ is talking about you have no standing in the matter. No one is going to care. He will not get in any trouble, if he is even contacted about it at all. If he is contacted about it and he thought there something that could get in to trouble all he has to do is claim "I made it up". There is no win to this at all.

[Tigzy]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

[another lurker]

Haha, human manlet peoples, I have not yet read the Hunger Games series or seen the movies!!!


...too busy lifting :bjarte:

[comhcinc]

Haha, human manlet peoples, I have not yet read the Hunger Games series or seen the movies!!!


...too busy lifting :bjarte:

You can't do both? Pfffffft women.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

So, yeah, it's been out there. I just would really prefer not to link it with A/S online if possible because of the low public opinion of atheism wrt morals

You mean, the part about atheists fucking their dogs?

[Shatterface as Guest]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

That's two death threats: send Dawkins to ISIS. Burn him.

- Shatterface

[comhcinc]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

That's two death threats: send Dawkins to ISIS. Burn him.

- Shatterface

Notice the butthurt over the money Dawkins makes?

[Rat Bastard]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

That's two death threats: send Dawkins to ISIS. Burn him.

- Shatterface

Does that make Dawkins Witch of the Week again? Maybe even RW could agree, what with the burning reference like they used to do to witches.

[comhcinc]

So I thought this was fake.
http://i.imgur.com/PiuNGMC.jpg

[comhcinc]

But I was wrong

And I hit submit instead of preview.

[Kirbmarc]

There are differences among feminists in terms of our analyses and the strategies and tactics we decide are appropriate for our own liberation. Choose those whom you wish to support and then support them by advocating amongst men. Keep your critiques of individual feminists or feminist perspectives to yourselves. As a result of our exploitation and oppression there is horizontal fighting and even bullying between us sometimes. Leave this to us to sort out. Your “contributions” to the fight only make matters worse, divide us further, force us to choose between our supporters, make male opinions the issue instead of feminist opinions and generally stall our efforts. If you think you have some brilliant insight or thought that no woman has had that can save our movement or send us unerringly in the right direction – I don’t believe you. But feel free to send us a secret message via a feminist friend.

It’s a fact that you will hear some women/feminists say things that sound negative toward men and about men. Leave it alone. It is the result of our experiences of violence and oppression. There isn’t one single woman who isn’t placed somewhere on the continuum of violence against women either as a direct or vicarious victim. Let us deal with it and accept that a generations-long system of oppression and violence has done its work on some of us. Wait for us. And don’t take it personally – it just makes you sound defensive and it lengthens the time it takes for each of us to come to terms with our lives and the lives of our sisters. Be particularly attentive to this with women whom you know have experienced violence and those of us who work with them.

"How to be a male feminist ally."

Basically you don't have the right to criticize anything other than other men.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Any chance we can add a 0 to Scalia?

Actually, I find Scalia the only SC justice whose rulings are consistent. Wrong, but consistent. Oh, and Thomas, who just cribs off of Scalia's staff, except when he periodically argues that the 10th Amendment means the federal government has no power to do anything ever.

The other seven are hypocritical cunts who forget the Constitution when they want to promote one of their side's initiatives, then suddenly remember the Constitution when they want to block one of the other side's initiatives.

[Tribble]

So I thought this was fake.
http://i.imgur.com/PiuNGMC.jpg

WTF? What magic?

[Matt Cavanaugh]

To put it another way, Peeta is trying to work his way out of the Nice Guy Zone.

I got the impression Gale was also in the friend zone because Katniss didn't want to get married or have children. Gale was working out by kissing her in the woods and promising her he'd support her family while she was in the games and otherwise using his hunky masculine sex appeal to woo her.

Gale is in the Friend Zone, but Katniss has stirrings of romantic feelings for him, even though she's been too völkisch out hunting to feed her family to recognize it. Peeta she barely even remembers, even though he's had a crush/stalking/white knight obsession thingie for her for, like, forever.

[katamari Damassi]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

That's two death threats: send Dawkins to ISIS. Burn him.

- Shatterface

I got a kick out of this comment by Esper over at Nugent's blog: "It's okay when we do it, shall be the whole of the law."

[Tribble]

Any chance we can add a 0 to Scalia?

Actually, I find Scalia the only SC justice whose rulings are consistent. Wrong, but consistent. Oh, and Thomas, who just cribs off of Scalia's staff, except when he periodically argues that the 10th Amendment means the federal government has no power to do anything ever.

The other seven are hypocritical cunts who forget the Constitution when they want to promote one of their side's initiatives, then suddenly remember the Constitution when they want to block one of the other side's initiatives.

I agree. Scalia is consistent in his weird, frequently wrong-headed little way. Thomas is even more of a lunatic than you say. He doesn't even believe in stare decisis, even in cases decided by the Supreme Court and that everything could, and perhaps should, be re-litigated forever as if there were no precedents.

But that's not even one of his more bizzare beliefs. For example, Thomas believes that States have the right to set up their own religions. And he said that THIS YEAR. Not as some wooly-headed teenager who smoked too much pot and had too little common sense. But as a sitting, long-term Supreme Court Justice.

The rest do tend to blow more politically than judicially. For example, in bending over to be 'tough on crime' we can thank the liberal justices for supporting the routine 4th amendment violations we suffer through these bizarre asset forfeiture laws where cops can legally steal shit for their department by making up a phony probable cause. We can thank the liberal justices for the taking of our property, through the abuse of eminent domain, by the government for the benefit of developers under the guise of 'community redevelopment' which usually means a big shopping mall that sits half-empty.

And the conservatives have their foibles too. The constant erosion of the 5th amendment in allowing unreasonable searches of flimsy, phony pretexts is one. And there are others.

[Tribble]

Gale is in the Friend Zone, but Katniss has stirrings of romantic feelings for him, even though she's been too gay out hunting to feed her family to recognize it. Peeta she barely even remembers, even though he's had a crush/stalking/white knight obsession thingie for her for, like, forever.

lol. That's as good a summary as anyone has ever made.

[comhcinc]

So I thought this was fake.
http://i.imgur.com/PiuNGMC.jpg

WTF? What magic?

Why the magic of song and dance don't you know!
[youtube]S2f9dFrvBr4[/youtube]

[Matt Cavanaugh]

WTF? I didn't write "too gay out hunting", I "wrote "too völksich"

[Shatterface as Guest]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

That's two death threats: send Dawkins to ISIS. Burn him.

- Shatterface

I got a kick out of this comment by Esper over at Nugent's blog: "It's okay when we do it, shall be the whole of the law."

Anyone got a link to a freeze page so I can post it at Nugent's?

- Shatterface

[Matt Cavanaugh]

FWIW, he's never failed to let any of my moderated posts through. But he checks because I quote people and they use bad words like "demented fuckwit."

I think I saw the word "lying" in your post. That'll do it, IIRC.

Yes, that's one that's got me before.[/quote]
"mendacious"
"disingenuous""
"untruthful"

have all sailed through mod for me.

[CuntajusRationality]

I am going to explain this out and then I am dropping it. When PZ gets done reading the latest tentacle porn (comics come out on Wednesdays) and hops on his laptop to check the pit, he will see you post saying "hey everyone look you can report bad things PZ did anonymously!". He is going to take that in the most unflattering light (as honestly I am as well), and he is going to start claiming that the pit is encouraging people to file false reports anonymously about him.

You say you don't mean that and I am taking you at your word.

Now the other part. Unless you were involved in the event that PZ is talking about you have no standing in the matter. No one is going to care. He will not get in any trouble, if he is even contacted about it at all. If he is contacted about it and he thought there something that could get in to trouble all he has to do is claim "I made it up". There is no win to this at all.

I appreciate you being willing to take me at my word and I'm also content to let it go here as I've had my say already. Though in the end, it sounds like we'll have to agree to disagree on this particular point.

[comhcinc]

Actually, I find Scalia the only SC justice whose rulings are consistent. Wrong, but consistent. Oh, and Thomas, who just cribs off of Scalia's staff, except when he periodically argues that the 10th Amendment means the federal government has no power to do anything ever.

The other seven are hypocritical cunts who forget the Constitution when they want to promote one of their side's initiatives, then suddenly remember the Constitution when they want to block one of the other side's initiatives.

I agree. Scalia is consistent in his weird, frequently wrong-headed little way. Thomas is even more of a lunatic than you say. He doesn't even believe in stare decisis, even in cases decided by the Supreme Court and that everything could, and perhaps should, be re-litigated forever as if there were no precedents.

I agree with both of you that at least your can follow Scalia's logic on a constant basis. I was really disappointed with all the mocking the guy got for believing in the Devil last year. I mean I am elitist snooty atheist but of course he believes in the devil. The author acting like that was shocking was fucking stupid.

[Shatterface as Guest]

So I thought this was fake.
http://i.imgur.com/PiuNGMC.jpg

That's why there are so many in Harry Potter.

- Shatterface

[Nec_V20]

Any chance we can add a 0 to Scalia?

Actually, I find Scalia the only SC justice whose rulings are consistent. Wrong, but consistent. Oh, and Thomas, who just cribs off of Scalia's staff, except when he periodically argues that the 10th Amendment means the federal government has no power to do anything ever.

The other seven are hypocritical cunts who forget the Constitution when they want to promote one of their side's initiatives, then suddenly remember the Constitution when they want to block one of the other side's initiatives.

I agree. Scalia is consistent in his weird, frequently wrong-headed little way. Thomas is even more of a lunatic than you say. He doesn't even believe in stare decisis, even in cases decided by the Supreme Court and that everything could, and perhaps should, be re-litigated forever as if there were no precedents.

But that's not even one of his more bizzare beliefs. For example, Thomas believes that States have the right to set up their own religions. And he said that THIS YEAR. Not as some wooly-headed teenager who smoked too much pot and had too little common sense. But as a sitting, long-term Supreme Court Justice.

The rest do tend to blow more politically than judicially. For example, in bending over to be 'tough on crime' we can thank the liberal justices for supporting the routine 4th amendment violations we suffer through these bizarre asset forfeiture laws where cops can legally steal shit for their department by making up a phony probable cause. We can thank the liberal justices for the taking of our property, through the abuse of eminent domain, by the government for the benefit of developers under the guise of 'community redevelopment' which usually means a big shopping mall that sits half-empty.

And the conservatives have their foibles too. The constant erosion of the 5th amendment in allowing unreasonable searches of flimsy, phony pretexts is one. And there are others.

How would you, or anyone, know what Thomas believes? He is renowned for not saying anything - I think he went just over three years between statements in court as the longest period of muteness - and always votes the same way as Scalia.

Thomas is a non-entity.

[CuntajusRationality]

So I thought this was fake.

WTF? What magic?

And get this: A study just found that white people think that black people are actually, legitimately magic. It's the Magical Negro trope in real-life action. According to Social Psychological & Personality Science, researchers at Chicago's Northwestern University conducted a series of five studies, including implicit association tests where participants look at a computer screen and have random words flashed at them and have to quickly categorize them as being either black or white. The study found words like "ghost," "paranormal" and "spirit" were more often categorized as being "black" by white people. A further test explicitly found that the more participants thought of black people as superhuman, the less they viewed them as having the capacity to feel pain, presumably because they can counter bouts of agony with their magical Wolverine-like healing powers or ancient and mysterious witch-brewed tinctures.

As Mother Jones's Inae Oh ​no​tes, white people's tendency to cast a black person as some sort of magic wizard is just as stereotypical as thinking of them as the clichéd "angry woman" or "absentee father". And as researchers Adam Waytz, Kelly Marie Hoffman and Sophie Trawalter write in their study, that same tendency might lead people to think young black men are "more 'adult' than white juveniles when judging culpability." At root, this is why black teens get shot for no real reason and rich white kid​s literally get away with killing four people.

[another lurker]

WTF? I didn't write "too gay out hunting", I "wrote "too völksich"

All this talk of lumbersex..is messing with your autocorrect

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... 81-h386-nc

[Eskarina]

http://i.imgur.com/H8gsd1S.png

Fucking useless prick taking on the Mick Nugent fan club from the safety of Peez's blog. :lol:

That's two death threats: send Dawkins to ISIS. Burn him.

- Shatterface

Notice the butthurt over the money Dawkins makes?

I'd love to watch a Battle of Wits between Dawkins and Anthony K.

I don't always root for the underdog.

[comhcinc]

Jeebus; he who shall not be named makes a post and the whole site gets slow. Maybe he is a 1337 haxor!

[Matt Cavanaugh]

So I thought this was fake.

WTF? What magic?

And get this: A study just found that white people think that black people are actually, legitimately magic. It's the Magical Negro trope in real-life action. According to Social Psychological & Personality Science, researchers at Chicago's Northwestern University conducted a series of five studies, including implicit association tests where participants look at a computer screen and have random words flashed at them and have to quickly categorize them as being either black or white. The study found words like "ghost," "paranormal" and "spirit" were more often categorized as being "black" by white people. A further test explicitly found that the more participants thought of black people as superhuman, the less they viewed them as having the capacity to feel pain, presumably because they can counter bouts of agony with their magical Wolverine-like healing powers or ancient and mysterious witch-brewed tinctures.

As Mother Jones's Inae Oh ​no​tes, white people's tendency to cast a black person as some sort of magic wizard is just as stereotypical as thinking of them as the clichéd "angry woman" or "absentee father". And as researchers Adam Waytz, Kelly Marie Hoffman and Sophie Trawalter write in their study, that same tendency might lead people to think young black men are "more 'adult' than white juveniles when judging culpability." At root, this is why black teens get shot for no real reason and rich white kid​s literally get away with killing four people.

Those implicit bias tests are a load of crap.

Colored folks do dabble in gris-gris, however.

[Shatterface as Guest]

Malfoy 's not black - he just dresses like a pimp in a blaxploitation movie:

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2007 ... Malfoy.jpg

More black magic:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... co_Mal.JPG

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2010 ... ledore.jpg

http://www.mckellen.com/images/t/3129.jpg

http://www.timelessmyths.com/arthurian/ ... merlin.jpg

[Shatterface as Guest]

http://angrytorro.com/fs/i/2012/03/04/c ... 9d592b.jpg

There are exceptions

- Shatterface

[Tony Parsehole]

WTF? I didn't write "too gay out hunting", I "wrote "too völksich"

hahaha. Really?

[Tigzy]

I'd love to watch a Battle of Wits between Dawkins and Anthony K.

Hardly a fair contest, considering Anthony K's handicap in this regard.

[another lurker]

I'd love to watch a Battle of Wits between Dawkins and Anthony K.

Hardly a fair contest, considering Anthony K's handicap in this regard.

Don't be so ableist, shitlord!

[Tigzy]

@another_lurker

To hell with your ableist word-policing, I'll say or write 'Anthony K' as much as I like.

[jugheadnaut]

In Catching Fire, Katniss is not given much to do other than be confused and shell-shocked. The book gave more of an explanation of what was going on in her head, which wasn't presented properly in the film. Can't blame The Goddess Jennifer for that.

She didn't do a very convincing job of portraying shell-shock. She was just kind of listless and deadpan. Some of her dialog was cringeworthy, which isn't her fault. But rather than find a way to make it work, her delivery just emphasized how bad it was. I think her strength as an actress is in emoting, and when she was allowed to do so in the second half she seemed like an entirely different actress.

[another lurker]

In Catching Fire, Katniss is not given much to do other than be confused and shell-shocked. The book gave more of an explanation of what was going on in her head, which wasn't presented properly in the film. Can't blame The Goddess Jennifer for that.

She didn't do a very convincing job of portraying shell-shock. She was just kind of listless and deadpan. Some of her dialog was cringeworthy, which isn't her fault. But rather than find a way to make it work, her delivery just emphasized how bad it was. I think her strength as an actress is in emoting, and when she was allowed to do so in the second half she seemed like an entirely different actress.

Her strength as an actress is in her boobs*


*OK not really, I just wanted to talk about boobs.

[Guest]

But that's not even one of his more bizzare beliefs. For example, Thomas believes that States have the right to set up their own religions. And he said that THIS YEAR. Not as some wooly-headed teenager who smoked too much pot and had too little common sense. But as a sitting, long-term Supreme Court Justice.

What's bizarre is incorporation doctrine. Reinterpreting the constitution because passing another amendment would be difficult is retarded, it nullifies the point of constitutions.

[jugheadnaut]

So I thought this was fake.
http://i.imgur.com/PiuNGMC.jpg

Well, after analyzing an atypically good social science paper yesterday, now we're back to the usual slop. The paper itself is behind a paywall, so I can't see the details. But from the title and abstract, one thing screams out. Where are the controls? Even if the study was perfectly designed and executed (a huge assumption), couldn't the result be a function of xenophobic othering, where group members will irrationally and mostly subconsciously attribute strange properties to outside groups they have very limited direct experience with? They only did the test for whites on blacks. Shouldn't they also have done it for blacks on whites? And for other races?

Or perhaps this is an example of SJW science. Because whites are the only ones with 'power', only their attitude to other races is open to evaluation and criticism.

[Pitchguest]

Haha, you guys delivered. I didn't think so many would take me up on it! I went with Cuntajus'. Cheers. :D

Matt's indiegogo just hit 20K.

[CuntajusRationality]

I'd love to watch a Battle of Wits between Dawkins and Anthony K.

Hardly a fair contest, considering Anthony K's handicap in this regard.

http://i.imgur.com/bSC2lzu.jpg

[Tribble]

So I thought this was fake.

WTF? What magic?

And get this: A study just found that white people think that black people are actually, legitimately magic. It's the Magical Negro trope in real-life action. According to Social Psychological & Personality Science, researchers at Chicago's Northwestern University conducted a series of five studies, including implicit association tests where participants look at a computer screen and have random words flashed at them and have to quickly categorize them as being either black or white. The study found words like "ghost," "paranormal" and "spirit" were more often categorized as being "black" by white people. A further test explicitly found that the more participants thought of black people as superhuman, the less they viewed them as having the capacity to feel pain, presumably because they can counter bouts of agony with their magical Wolverine-like healing powers or ancient and mysterious witch-brewed tinctures.

As Mother Jones's Inae Oh ​no​tes, white people's tendency to cast a black person as some sort of magic wizard is just as stereotypical as thinking of them as the clichéd "angry woman" or "absentee father". And as researchers Adam Waytz, Kelly Marie Hoffman and Sophie Trawalter write in their study, that same tendency might lead people to think young black men are "more 'adult' than white juveniles when judging culpability." At root, this is why black teens get shot for no real reason and rich white kid​s literally get away with killing four people.

Ah, yes, this is why I stopped reading Mother Jones. Too much magical thinking. Only it's the magical thinking of the Evil White Male Patriarchy Suppressing the Innocent Minority & Women...