Bleeding from the Bunghole

Old subthreads
KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5419
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32881

Post by KiwiInOz »

zenbabe wrote: snip

Also, the word "nice" was generally not a.. a nice thing.. to describe someone or something in my beloved Jane Austin books. Her characters usually had to clarify that they were not being "nice", or that a thing was not "nice" (because that was something negative). Though the word is a little shifty in her works (because the meaning had been apparently undergoing a lot of flux), as seen in the explanation and example below:
nice (adj.)
late 13c., "foolish, stupid, senseless," from Old French nice (12c.) "careless, clumsy; weak; poor, needy; simple, stupid, silly, foolish," from Latin nescius "ignorant, unaware," literally "not-knowing," from ne- "not" (see un-) + stem of scire "to know" (see science). "The sense development has been extraordinary, even for an adj." [Weekley] -- from "timid" (pre-1300); to "fussy, fastidious" (late 14c.); to "dainty, delicate" (c.1400); to "precise, careful" (1500s, preserved in such terms as a nice distinction and nice and early); to "agreeable, delightful" (1769); to "kind, thoughtful" (1830).

"In many examples from the 16th and 17th centuries it is difficult to say in what particular sense the writer intended it to be taken." [OED]

By 1926, it was pronounced "too great a favorite with the ladies, who have charmed out of it all its individuality and converted it into a mere diffuser of vague and mild agreeableness." [Fowler]

"I am sure," cried Catherine, "I did not mean to say anything wrong; but it is a nice book, and why should I not call it so?"
"Very true," said Henry, "and this is a very nice day, and we are taking a very nice walk; and you are two very nice young ladies. Oh! It is a very nice word indeed! It does for everything." [Jane Austen, "Northanger Abbey," 1803]
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=nice
The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter. Witch.

http://ca.pbsstatic.com/l/31/8531/9780894808531.jpg

piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32882

Post by piginthecity »

Love the SJKs Gefan, Love 'em.

I think it's something to do with the pleading eyes and the beautiful fonts.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13658
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Blame Everything on Gallagher

#32883

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Tribble wrote:
http://transitionvoice.com/wp-content/u ... 750573.jpg


The first time I saw that, it was funny. That it became the focus of his act... It was so tiresome...
Has anyone else noticed how Gallagher's schtick is the functional equivalent of Almost Diamonds?

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Blame Everything on Gallagher

#32884

Post by Mykeru »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Has anyone else noticed how Gallagher's schtick is the functional equivalent of Almost Diamonds?
Close.

Closer:

[youtube]X-VuTAfxkd4[/youtube]

And just as questionably effective.

yomomma
.
.
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:52 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32885

Post by yomomma »

Ya'all are still bleeding from the bunghole? Maybe you should have that looked at.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32886

Post by Mykeru »

yomomma wrote:Ya'all are still bleeding from the bunghole? Maybe you should have that looked at.

But it's still fun

[youtube]niMa4POeG_A[/youtube]


Part of the epic work:

[youtube]PkrJB7Q0X3Q[/youtube]

How do I know this shit?

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32887

Post by Mykeru »

Incidentally, Don Hertzfeldt would be just like Bjarte. If you took away the intelligence, quirky humor, heart and, in a word, talent.

http://www.bitterfilms.com/

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32888

Post by welch »

Tigzy wrote:
Mykeru wrote: http://www.apollowebworks.com/russell/i ... l-face.jpg

"My presupposition of my own superiority is based entirely on my not being Jeff Dees"
Russell Glasser looks like an Android knockoff of Steve Jobs.

:rimshot:
I was thinking Jony Ives, but yeah.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32889

Post by Mykeru »

welch wrote:
Tigzy wrote:
Mykeru wrote: http://www.apollowebworks.com/russell/i ... l-face.jpg

"My presupposition of my own superiority is based entirely on my not being Jeff Dees"
Russell Glasser looks like an Android knockoff of Steve Jobs.

:rimshot:
I was thinking Jony Ives, but yeah.

I was thinking...

dickhead-russell-face.jpg
(111.3 KiB) Downloaded 437 times

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 10769
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32890

Post by free thoughtpolice »

BREAKING NEWS!!Ophelia Benson is not totally unjustified in her islamaphobia! Recent suicide bombings in south Russia point to atheist MRA types striving to disrupt the Olympics in Sochi! Sexist/misogynist/libertarian/MRApists muslim males are the favorite tool of the patriarchy/kyriarchy to cause mayhem!
(Content warning) severe paranoia

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8051
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32891

Post by AndrewV69 »

OK, I was certain that it could not possibly get any worse (more fool me):

Let me quote here:
Marvolous Star
33 minutes ago

Why? Why? FIRST REBECA BLACK NOW THIS KID. WHY DO YOU RUIN PEOPLE LIVES.
Why Indeed!

Alison Gold - Chinese Food (Official Music Video)
[youtube]wWLhrHVySgA[/youtube]

Gefan
.
.
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:55 pm
Location: In a handbasket, apparently.

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32892

Post by Gefan »

Mykeru wrote: ...Sorry, Jesus being "all man and all god" isn't a scientific question...
The "all man" bit is especially dubious...

[youtube]Gw3eP2JPFIY[/youtube]

ROBOKiTTY
.
.
Posts: 1224
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 2:47 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32893

Post by ROBOKiTTY »

I kinda liked that Alison Gold mewsic video. I don't see what there is to hate about it. As a Chinese speciesfluid nonbinary robotic kitteh, I'm not even offended by the cultural inaccuracies and grammatically nonsensical Chinese subtitles. It's not meant to be taken seriously, anyway.

ROBOKiTTY
.
.
Posts: 1224
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 2:47 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32894

Post by ROBOKiTTY »

Meanwhile:

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/politica ... 2D11820136

Social Justice League, what are you doing about this problem?

SoylentAtheist

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32895

Post by SoylentAtheist »

AndrewV69 wrote:OK, I was certain that it could not possibly get any worse (more fool me):
Let me quote here:
Why Indeed!
Alison Gold - Chinese Food (Official Music Video)
[youtube]wWLhrHVySgA[/youtube]
If you are going to suck & fail, suck & fail in as big of a way as you possibly can.

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5419
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32896

Post by KiwiInOz »

Only 6 hours and 24 minutes until tomorrow.

DownThunder
.
.
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 8:10 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32897

Post by DownThunder »

KiwiInOz wrote:Only 6 hours and 24 minutes until tomorrow.
Fistbump for timezone privilege.

Fuck it though, Im going to bed. You've seen on you've seen them all. Too old for this shit.

:bjarte: Outrageous.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32898

Post by Mykeru »

Gefan wrote:
The "all man" bit is especially dubious...
The hell the filmmakers are going to will be fabulous.

Ape+lust
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 7364
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:55 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32899

Post by Ape+lust »


zenbabe
.
.
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:51 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32900

Post by zenbabe »

:lol:

Holy hell Ape+Lust, that is scathing.

The Melody one is scorching!
The Stephanie one is nightmarish!
The Rebecca one is disturbing!
Did you change the Ophie picture at all?
PZ with his halo! ".. no longer include a fucking internet connection." hahahahaha
"massive word arrangements" !! hahahaha!

SoylentAtheist

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32901

Post by SoylentAtheist »

ROBOKiTTY wrote:Meanwhile:
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/politica ... 2D11820136
Social Justice League, what are you doing about this problem?
Hmm... The first thing to do is to look at the original survey.
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publ ... evolution/

Looking at this chart specifically

http://i.imgur.com/NIoq8sQ.png

It appears as if this whole anti-evolution idea is just flat out dying out. Sure you can try to speed it along, but I am not sure it is worth the effort.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32902

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

On this last day of 2013, I award the Lulz of the Year to Ape+Lust, Gumby and Gefan (in no particular order).

piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32903

Post by piginthecity »

I love THE Slymepit
You know that it's TRUE
Gumby, Gefan, Photoshops
Slyme - p - p - p - pit !

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32904

Post by JackSkeptic »

SoylentAtheist wrote:
ROBOKiTTY wrote:Meanwhile:
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/politica ... 2D11820136
Social Justice League, what are you doing about this problem?
Hmm... The first thing to do is to look at the original survey.
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publ ... evolution/

Looking at this chart specifically

http://i.imgur.com/NIoq8sQ.png

It appears as if this whole anti-evolution idea is just flat out dying out. Sure you can try to speed it along, but I am not sure it is worth the effort.
I still find it incredible the percentages that believe in something other than evolution are so high. It's shameful at any level of education.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32905

Post by Mykeru »

I wonder what will be the new drama of 2014. Probably a sequel:
Vagina-Monologues-II-poster.jpg
(98.13 KiB) Downloaded 363 times

Tribble
.
.
Posts: 5102
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32906

Post by Tribble »

Gefan wrote:
Mykeru wrote: ...Sorry, Jesus being "all man and all god" isn't a scientific question...
The "all man" bit is especially dubious...

[youtube]Gw3eP2JPFIY[/youtube]
Oh, I love that video. It's going along being all cute and stuff, then BOOM!

TheMan
.
.
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:56 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32907

Post by TheMan »

Spoiler alert: apparently the world is a globe and it's next year now in this part of the world.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32908

Post by Badger3k »

Meanwhile, since we last saw Zombie Ophelia...her latest post is an attempt to justify her lack of creativity, original content, and in some cases probable outright theft of copyrighted material: Pay it forward. Starts out giving something by a poet who encourages kids to copy and/or plagiarize (judging by what Ophie says, at least). Not sure I like that idea - in limited amounts, maybe, but after hearing the low-talent hacks who "sample" (i.e. steal) other musician's works...not thrilled with it. But, as is almost become hackneyed, the kicker:
One of the haters’ tropes about me is that a lot of my blogging involves pointing to other people’s writing. Yes, that’s right, it does. And?
That’s not a bug, it’s a feature. I like being pointed to other people’s writing, and I like returning the favor. I like a good salmagundi, and I like making one. It’s all good.
:naughty:
No. It's not all good. It's amazing - one of my early complaints about B&W was the lack of original content (and this is in general to a lot of "atheist bloggers" - among others. I would get a news article in my feed, and maybe read it, maybe not...then I'd see the same thing written about by a hundred bloggers, and many of them are just like Ophie - a copypasta and a few words as garnish. WTF? If all you want to do is point something out, unless your readers live in a bubble (and here, Ophie may be right to do this - I suspect a lot of her readers have very restricted reading habits), they probably have already seen the story. If you can't add something new or creative, or interesting at the least, to the story...why bother? The lack of intellectual stimulation and challenge is disgusting.

Hmm...maybe I can use that to my benefit. I can set up my news aggregator to copy stories, and have a program just print out random phrases, like "it's not a bug, it's a feature" or "interesting...", and then get myself set up at FTB. I can make a fortune, since the bar is so incredibly low.

Do you ever wonder if Ed hasn't had nightmares over the mess his network has become? Has he ever regretted letting the crazy cat lady and others in his "house" (well, it's Ophie's workplace, not Ed's house, except when people come into it and comment, then it's a house and living room all of a sudden)?

I need sleep.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32909

Post by Badger3k »

TheMan wrote:Spoiler alert: apparently the world is a globe and it's next year now in this part of the world.
Dammit - I was almost to the end! Now I have PTSD.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32910

Post by Badger3k »

Derp - I see PZ has just discovered that the Duck Dynasty bigot and homophobe, and fundie asshat...is all of those. I have never seen the show and I knew all that a long time ago. Maybe they do live under rocks.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32911

Post by Pitchguest »

Someone responded to me on Marcotte's 'It's sexist to hate cats' article, asking me if I did reading comprehension, and while I kind of wanted to keep my reaction to the article brief (lots of laughter) I decided to respond to this one person. Sadly, though, my permission to respond had been revoked.

Nevertheless, here it is for posterity.
No, I do reading comprehension very well. I just don't do crazy, which is probably why this article doesn't agree with me.

Amanda hypothetises that cats are associated not just with women, but single, childless women. Are they? I confess I must've missed that societal cue. But more than that, she says that what a lot of people are doing when they say cats doesn't really love you and we must be fooling ourselves is a kind of <i>mansplaining</i>. Mansplaining?? Why that particular expression? Why not patronising or some other gender neutral word? Maybe so that it would better fit in with her rhetoric that people who don't like cats are sexist?

What about men? Don't they own cats too? Why the need for this silly 'cat lady' argument? Does it fit into the larger narrative that women are dumb and needy and cling to cats? No, it doesn't, because guess what, different people have different preferences and some people prefer cats and some people prefer dogs. Not all men choose dogs and not all women choose cats. Which is why Amanda's argument is such a stupid, laughable argument that it made me loudly guffaw when reading it the first time.

For crying out loud, there is so much wrong with it that I'm not sure why I should have to point them out. But just to make a point: My sister likes dogs <i>and</i> cats. She says that when she gets her own apartment, she's going to get both. On the other hand, my mother? Hates cats. Hates them. Doesn't want anything to do with them. But she likes dogs. Does that mean she is subliminally sexist? Give me a fucking break.

Amanda has a confirmation bias the size of a small country and she has the ego to boot. If she honestly thinks people's preferences of cats and dogs, or their dislike of one or the other, she's an idiot. A radical feminist idiot.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/20/w ... s-so-much/

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32912

Post by Pitchguest »

Whoops, that should be "If she honestly thinks people's preferences of cats and dogs, or their dislike of one or the other, IS SEXIST, she's an idiot."

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32913

Post by Mykeru »

Pitchguest wrote:Sadly, though, my permission to respond had been revoked.
And, it bears repeating, this is why I never comment on FTB, Raw Story or any of the authoritarian blogs. The game is rigged. All one manages to do is frustrate oneself and, not coincidentally, drive up the offending site's traffic. You first check the article, then you comment, then you have to check to see if your response was shit-canned and all they see is hit-hit-hit while giving the false impression to everyone who isn't you of not only agreement, but that dissenters -- that being you -- can't stick in a fight.

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32914

Post by JackSkeptic »

Mykeru wrote:
Pitchguest wrote:Sadly, though, my permission to respond had been revoked.
And, it bears repeating, this is why I never comment on FTB, Raw Story or any of the authoritarian blogs. The game is rigged. All one manages to do is frustrate oneself and, not coincidentally, drive up the offending site's traffic. You first check the article, then you comment, then you have to check to see if your response was shit-canned and all they see is hit-hit-hit while giving the false impression to everyone who isn't you of not only agreement, but that dissenters -- that being you -- can't stick in a fight.
I also find it funny when they scream and cry for being blocked and censored yet routinely do the same for anyone presenting an alternate view to theirs. They then label anything that challenges their view as 'hating' and 'PTSD inducing' They are so dishonest it would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact they spread their poison whenever they can.

Notice to all bloggers. If your routinely censor and block anything you dislike you are only fooling yourself and the stupid. And the stupid will eventually represent the majority of your responders. You are intellectual cowards and lightweights. If you want to spew your thoughts into the world yet can't handle people reacting to them do not expect people to take you seriously or give a stuff about your vacuous opinions.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1734
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32915

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Pitchguest wrote:Someone responded to me on Marcotte's 'It's sexist to hate cats' article, asking me if I did reading comprehension, and while I kind of wanted to keep my reaction to the article brief (lots of laughter) I decided to respond to this one person. Sadly, though, my permission to respond had been revoked.

Nevertheless, here it is for posterity.
No, I do reading comprehension very well. I just don't do crazy, which is probably why this article doesn't agree with me.

Amanda hypothetises that cats are associated not just with women, but single, childless women. Are they? I confess I must've missed that societal cue. But more than that, she says that what a lot of people are doing when they say cats doesn't really love you and we must be fooling ourselves is a kind of <i>mansplaining</i>. Mansplaining?? Why that particular expression? Why not patronising or some other gender neutral word? Maybe so that it would better fit in with her rhetoric that people who don't like cats are sexist?

What about men? Don't they own cats too? Why the need for this silly 'cat lady' argument? Does it fit into the larger narrative that women are dumb and needy and cling to cats? No, it doesn't, because guess what, different people have different preferences and some people prefer cats and some people prefer dogs. Not all men choose dogs and not all women choose cats. Which is why Amanda's argument is such a stupid, laughable argument that it made me loudly guffaw when reading it the first time.

For crying out loud, there is so much wrong with it that I'm not sure why I should have to point them out. But just to make a point: My sister likes dogs <i>and</i> cats. She says that when she gets her own apartment, she's going to get both. On the other hand, my mother? Hates cats. Hates them. Doesn't want anything to do with them. But she likes dogs. Does that mean she is subliminally sexist? Give me a fucking break.

Amanda has a confirmation bias the size of a small country and she has the ego to boot. If she honestly thinks people's preferences of cats and dogs, or their dislike of one or the other, she's an idiot. A radical feminist idiot.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/20/w ... s-so-much/
Just a little correction. 'Patronising' is not gender neutral. Derived from 'pater', or 'pops' to you. If I were given to SJ Warrioring I'd be pointing out how insulting it is to dad types, but I won't because I'm not.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32916

Post by Mykeru »

JackSkeptic wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
Pitchguest wrote:Sadly, though, my permission to respond had been revoked.
And, it bears repeating, this is why I never comment on FTB, Raw Story or any of the authoritarian blogs. The game is rigged. All one manages to do is frustrate oneself and, not coincidentally, drive up the offending site's traffic. You first check the article, then you comment, then you have to check to see if your response was shit-canned and all they see is hit-hit-hit while giving the false impression to everyone who isn't you of not only agreement, but that dissenters -- that being you -- can't stick in a fight.
I also find it funny when they scream and cry for being blocked and censored yet routinely do the same for anyone presenting an alternate view to theirs. They then label anything that challenges their view as 'hating' and 'PTSD inducing' They are so dishonest it would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact they spread their poison whenever they can.

Notice to all bloggers. If your routinely censor and block anything you dislike you are only fooling yourself and the stupid. And the stupid will eventually represent the majority of your responders. You are intellectual cowards and lightweights. If you want to spew your thoughts into the world yet can't handle people reacting to them do not expect people to take you seriously or give a stuff about your vacuous opinions.
Way back when dinosaurs ruled the earth and I ran a mostly political blog site, we had a forum " Salon des Refusés", which alludes to the fact that the sort of people we wanted were those thrown off other blogs for having an opinion. As it was my blog I was the Sooper-Dooper Administrator and enlisted minions to do the day-to-day moderation. I had been formerly dogpiled and banned from The Straight Dope and The Darwin Awards and ran it, well, pretty much like The Pit.

What I got out of bad experiences with those forums was that some people think your job is to express their ideas when you are in "their house". I checked a lot of blog's fine print and never saw it expressly stated, so it must have been an unwritten rule.

The couple of times I had to interceded was to give mods a warning about being too loose with the ban-hammer. In fact, I really couldn't be convinced anything was a ban-able offense. So the person argued and was an annoying shit, so what? It's a forum. THAT'S THE POINT.

If I live in fear of anything, it's being one of these deluded/cynical fuckers rigging what should be a free and open exchange because they have an agenda and, god dammit, you will serve it.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32917

Post by Tigzy »

Pitchguest wrote:Someone responded to me on Marcotte's 'It's sexist to hate cats' article, asking me if I did reading comprehension, and while I kind of wanted to keep my reaction to the article brief (lots of laughter) I decided to respond to this one person. Sadly, though, my permission to respond had been revoked.

Nevertheless, here it is for posterity.
No, I do reading comprehension very well. I just don't do crazy, which is probably why this article doesn't agree with me.

Amanda hypothetises that cats are associated not just with women, but single, childless women. Are they? I confess I must've missed that societal cue. But more than that, she says that what a lot of people are doing when they say cats doesn't really love you and we must be fooling ourselves is a kind of <i>mansplaining</i>. Mansplaining?? Why that particular expression? Why not patronising or some other gender neutral word? Maybe so that it would better fit in with her rhetoric that people who don't like cats are sexist?

What about men? Don't they own cats too? Why the need for this silly 'cat lady' argument? Does it fit into the larger narrative that women are dumb and needy and cling to cats? No, it doesn't, because guess what, different people have different preferences and some people prefer cats and some people prefer dogs. Not all men choose dogs and not all women choose cats. Which is why Amanda's argument is such a stupid, laughable argument that it made me loudly guffaw when reading it the first time.

For crying out loud, there is so much wrong with it that I'm not sure why I should have to point them out. But just to make a point: My sister likes dogs <i>and</i> cats. She says that when she gets her own apartment, she's going to get both. On the other hand, my mother? Hates cats. Hates them. Doesn't want anything to do with them. But she likes dogs. Does that mean she is subliminally sexist? Give me a fucking break.

Amanda has a confirmation bias the size of a small country and she has the ego to boot. If she honestly thinks people's preferences of cats and dogs, or their dislike of one or the other, she's an idiot. A radical feminist idiot.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/20/w ... s-so-much/
Mandy Marcottage-cheese wrote:
Well, I think -
I'd take issue with that one, for a start.

Anyways, where are all these people who bag on cats so much? Has she not looked at the internets - ie, the domain of the cat-gods? Or is it just Mandy's confirmation bias at work again, in seeing an affliction to society as a whole when some people say they're just not that keen on cats?

In fact, why am I even bothering to care what this odd, parroting mannequin of the fashionable-left flaps its mouth unit about? You know, there is an aura of weirdness about Marcotte which I can't quite put my finger upon. She seems more a construct than a person, a peculiar patchwork composite of soundbitey-opinions which appear more the product of some variable-sorting algorithm than a real life human being. It's like a bunch of SJWs got together to create the perfect SJW replicant - with the end result being a specimen which amplifies their detachment from reality to a maximal degree, in being so literal and incapable of nuance. But it at least leaves me some hope that Marcotte might actually be capable of shutting up, by the simple expedient of unplugging her from the wall socket.

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32918

Post by BarnOwl »

Standard Marcotte et al. philosophy: judge people and assign them to groups based on the types of companion animals they do or don't have. Several years ago on Pharyngula, there was a similar brand of stupid, assigning negative qualities (natch, because the PeeZus would NEVER have a small dog) to people who have small dogs. One of several commenters who handed PeeZus' arse right back to him recalled the loyalty and companionship of her Pekinese dogs. Of course, Marcotte et al. conveniently ignore the fact that many people adopt pets in a fairly random or serendipitous manner: friend finds a stray (or two or three), someone at work is fostering irresistibly cute cats or dogs, abandoned dog jumps into your car at a friend's ranch, stray kitties fed on the back porch find a forever home, etc. But no, they MUST assign some patriarchal rape culture meaning to it, which confirms their weird biases and entitled sense of peeved oppression. :roll:

rpguest

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32919

Post by rpguest »

BarnOwl wrote:Standard Marcotte et al. philosophy: judge people and assign them to groups based on the types of companion animals they do or don't have. Several years ago on Pharyngula, there was a similar brand of stupid, assigning negative qualities (natch, because the PeeZus would NEVER have a small dog) to people who have small dogs. One of several commenters who handed PeeZus' arse right back to him recalled the loyalty and companionship of her Pekinese dogs. Of course, Marcotte et al. conveniently ignore the fact that many people adopt pets in a fairly random or serendipitous manner: friend finds a stray (or two or three), someone at work is fostering irresistibly cute cats or dogs, abandoned dog jumps into your car at a friend's ranch, stray kitties fed on the back porch find a forever home, etc. But no, they MUST assign some patriarchal rape culture meaning to it, which confirms their weird biases and entitled sense of peeved oppression. :roll:
what kind of patriarchal rapiness would having a pet owl indicate?

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32920

Post by BarnOwl »

Speaking of the fashionable left flapping its mouth, PeeZus has yet another post about Libertarians:
You cannot call yourself pro-liberty, even including the word in your name, if you are unwilling to recognize that the greatest oppressive force opposing freedom in America is unregulated greed. Libertarianism is a philosophy for the well-off, the privileged, and those who dream someday of being a wealthy boss with power over the peons. When capital is the measure of success, those who have it thrive at the expense of those who don’t; when we don’t have redistribution of wealth, we do not have equality of opportunity.
I'm certainly no fan of Libertarianism, and am usually annoyed by the ridiculous posturings of its many followers in my state, but it's inaccurate to assume that most of those followers are wealthy. Quite the contrary, by my observations. To me it seems to be a movement largely fueled by the desperate and ineffectual flailing of people who have disenfranchised themselves, and who have little or no power, influence, or disposable income. The Tea Party libertarian movement may very well eat itself in short order (one can hope).

I consider myself to be a progressive liberal (by US definitions), but I'm not going to deny that I benefit from the capitalist economy in the US. If wealth were redistributed across the country, I'd have much less than I do now. I could survive, and possibly be quite happy, but I'd be much less comfy. It's possible that PeeZus is willing to give up his current lifestyle to usher in some utopian egalitarian US vision, but the evidence to date indicates that he enjoys the wining and dining and expense-paid domestic and international travel, and partakes of it frequently. For starters, perhaps he should cut ties with a blogging network that operates on a capitalist model - if his messages are so important, then best disavow the ads revenue.

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32921

Post by BarnOwl »

rpguest wrote:
BarnOwl wrote:Standard Marcotte et al. philosophy: judge people and assign them to groups based on the types of companion animals they do or don't have. Several years ago on Pharyngula, there was a similar brand of stupid, assigning negative qualities (natch, because the PeeZus would NEVER have a small dog) to people who have small dogs. One of several commenters who handed PeeZus' arse right back to him recalled the loyalty and companionship of her Pekinese dogs. Of course, Marcotte et al. conveniently ignore the fact that many people adopt pets in a fairly random or serendipitous manner: friend finds a stray (or two or three), someone at work is fostering irresistibly cute cats or dogs, abandoned dog jumps into your car at a friend's ranch, stray kitties fed on the back porch find a forever home, etc. But no, they MUST assign some patriarchal rape culture meaning to it, which confirms their weird biases and entitled sense of peeved oppression. :roll:
what kind of patriarchal rapiness would having a pet owl indicate?
The kind that pukes up feathers and small bones when it's finished.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32922

Post by Mykeru »

BarnOwl wrote:Standard Marcotte et al. philosophy: judge people and assign them to groups based on the types of companion animals they do or don't have. Several years ago on Pharyngula, there was a similar brand of stupid, assigning negative qualities (natch, because the PeeZus would NEVER have a small dog) to people who have small dogs. One of several commenters who handed PeeZus' arse right back to him recalled the loyalty and companionship of her Pekinese dogs. Of course, Marcotte et al. conveniently ignore the fact that many people adopt pets in a fairly random or serendipitous manner: friend finds a stray (or two or three), someone at work is fostering irresistibly cute cats or dogs, abandoned dog jumps into your car at a friend's ranch, stray kitties fed on the back porch find a forever home, etc. But no, they MUST assign some patriarchal rape culture meaning to it, which confirms their weird biases and entitled sense of peeved oppression. :roll:
Marcotte is wasting her paltry talents on this penny-ante "what kind of dog you have" bigotry when she could be going for big time bigotry where she makes insulting generalizations about entire classes and races of people.

Oh, wait...
marcotte_3.jpg
(70.36 KiB) Downloaded 313 times
Okay...

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/BUzf2Jc4AsQ/hqdefault.jpg

"I can't help it if I find those bone-in-nose darkies adorable"

But, that was kind of sexist and racist, Amanda

http://www.avoiceformen.com/wp-content/ ... rcotte.jpg

"HAW! I know. I'm clueless. It's great being me"

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32923

Post by Tigzy »

rpguest wrote: what kind of patriarchal rapiness would having a pet owl indicate?
It depends on if you got the owl's consent before having it, I guess.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32924

Post by Old_ones »

:lol:

That's fucking hilarious. I can just imagine the triumphantly worded blog posts PZ Myers would be writing as his money was being stolen.

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32925

Post by BarnOwl »

"Kabuki Modrammah"

/snerk

:lol:

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13658
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32926

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Wishing everyone at the 'Pit an outrageous New Year.
:bjarte:

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4675
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32927

Post by another lurker »

BarnOwl wrote:Speaking of the fashionable left flapping its mouth, PeeZus has yet another post about Libertarians:
You cannot call yourself pro-liberty, even including the word in your name, if you are unwilling to recognize that the greatest oppressive force opposing freedom in America is unregulated greed. Libertarianism is a philosophy for the well-off, the privileged, and those who dream someday of being a wealthy boss with power over the peons. When capital is the measure of success, those who have it thrive at the expense of those who don’t; when we don’t have redistribution of wealth, we do not have equality of opportunity.
I'm certainly no fan of Libertarianism, and am usually annoyed by the ridiculous posturings of its many followers in my state, but it's inaccurate to assume that most of those followers are wealthy. Quite the contrary, by my observations. To me it seems to be a movement largely fueled by the desperate and ineffectual flailing of people who have disenfranchised themselves, and who have little or no power, influence, or disposable income. The Tea Party libertarian movement may very well eat itself in short order (one can hope).

I consider myself to be a progressive liberal (by US definitions), but I'm not going to deny that I benefit from the capitalist economy in the US. If wealth were redistributed across the country, I'd have much less than I do now. I could survive, and possibly be quite happy, but I'd be much less comfy. It's possible that PeeZus is willing to give up his current lifestyle to usher in some utopian egalitarian US vision, but the evidence to date indicates that he enjoys the wining and dining and expense-paid domestic and international travel, and partakes of it frequently. For starters, perhaps he should cut ties with a blogging network that operates on a capitalist model - if his messages are so important, then best disavow the ads revenue.
Well I was reading a right wing blog the other day and I just learned that the American revolution was in fact a *libertarian* movement, no liberalism at all. This of course coming from a guy who believes that man was only truly free when living under a king in a feudal society...

John D
.
.
Posts: 5054
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32928

Post by John D »

In other news.... Michael Shermer has decided to go full vegan after viewing the film "Speciesism". I guess he must have never really thought about it before...

http://vimeo.com/ondemand/speciesism

Al Stefanelli
.
.
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:55 am
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32929

Post by Al Stefanelli »

Justin Vacula's been traveling....

http://websitesonadime.com/vaculastash.png

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32930

Post by welch »

Badger3k wrote:Derp - I see PZ has just discovered that the Duck Dynasty bigot and homophobe, and fundie asshat...is all of those. I have never seen the show and I knew all that a long time ago. Maybe they do live under rocks.
Robertson is a fundie who credits his beliefs with saving his life and his marriage. Setting aside the truth, or lack thereof to these beliefs, given he has them, the fact he says the things he does is utterly unsurprising.

I watch and enjoy the show, because I think it's funny, even though it's staged as hell. But then, I get a lot of the jokes that someone who hasn't lived in the south a long time wouldn't get.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32931

Post by Mykeru »

Do we get a new thread for the new year?

Because there's no way an asshole could still be bleeding.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32932

Post by Mykeru »

welch wrote:
Badger3k wrote:Derp - I see PZ has just discovered that the Duck Dynasty bigot and homophobe, and fundie asshat...is all of those. I have never seen the show and I knew all that a long time ago. Maybe they do live under rocks.
Robertson is a fundie who credits his beliefs with saving his life and his marriage. Setting aside the truth, or lack thereof to these beliefs, given he has them, the fact he says the things he does is utterly unsurprising.

I watch and enjoy the show, because I think it's funny, even though it's staged as hell. But then, I get a lot of the jokes that someone who hasn't lived in the south a long time wouldn't get.
I think we should have a more rigorous system of vetting reality-tv rednecks, guidos, trailer trash, gold-diggers and the like to make sure they don't hold any unsavory beliefs.

http://releaf.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/redneck.jpg

http://totalfratmove.s3.amazonaws.com/w ... 111360.jpg

http://i.perezhilton.com/wp-content/upl ... m__oPt.jpg

Standards, people, standards.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32933

Post by Mykeru »

Mykeru wrote:Do we get a new thread for the new year?

Because there's no way an asshole could still be bleeding.
That is, of course, excepting Lsuoma's bottomless asshole.

Tony Parsehole
.
.
Posts: 6658
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:16 am
Location: Middlesbrough

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32934

Post by Tony Parsehole »

John D wrote:In other news.... Michael Shermer has decided to go full vegan after viewing the film "Speciesism". I guess he must have never really thought about it before...

http://vimeo.com/ondemand/speciesism
A multiple rapist whose moral code forbids him to eat cheese. You don't get many of those nowadays.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32935

Post by Mykeru »

Tony Parsehole wrote:
John D wrote:In other news.... Michael Shermer has decided to go full vegan after viewing the film "Speciesism". I guess he must have never really thought about it before...

http://vimeo.com/ondemand/speciesism
A multiple rapist whose moral code forbids him to eat cheese. You don't get many of those nowadays.
Of course it's okay to rape 'em, just so long as you don't kill and eat 'em after.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/6349c609fa79 ... o1_500.jpg

"Aw, you're no fun anymore"

zenbabe
.
.
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:51 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32936

Post by zenbabe »

Mykeru wrote:Do we get a new thread for the new year?

Because there's no way an asshole could still be bleeding.
Preach on!
:handgestures-fingerscrossed:

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13658
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32937

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

IMO, libertarianism is illogical. But it's also at core anarchy, so has more in common with Occupy than the Tea Party. Yes, the TP attracts anti- gov't types, but it's original message was to reduce gov't waste and corruption in politics. (How it's turned out in practice is another matter.) It's those sentiments that make the TP appealing to regular, middle class folks.

Even when Peezus is right, he can't get it right.

zenbabe
.
.
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:51 pm

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32938

Post by zenbabe »

I once spent New Year's Eve in Sydney, big anniversary of a bridge; had a magnificent and very private view of the fireworks, a lot of pricey alcohol, the heat of a summer evening, and the pitter patter of sexy time.

Ah well. If I never have another night like that at least I had one.
AMIRITE?

A cute cure:

[youtube]-Jv7X-SYxUk[/youtube]

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32939

Post by katamari Damassi »

welch wrote:
Badger3k wrote:Derp - I see PZ has just discovered that the Duck Dynasty bigot and homophobe, and fundie asshat...is all of those. I have never seen the show and I knew all that a long time ago. Maybe they do live under rocks.
Robertson is a fundie who credits his beliefs with saving his life and his marriage. Setting aside the truth, or lack thereof to these beliefs, given he has them, the fact he says the things he does is utterly unsurprising.

I watch and enjoy the show, because I think it's funny, even though it's staged as hell. But then, I get a lot of the jokes that someone who hasn't lived in the south a long time wouldn't get.
I watched about 15 minutes of it once, and it's pretty much The Beverly Hillbillies only less authentic.

Being gay, I supposed to be outraged by his remarks but I can't seem to make myself care.

casualnemesisguest

Re: Bleeding from the Bunghole

#32940

Post by casualnemesisguest »

Brilliant. The Melody shoop busts me up every time I think of it.

Locked