Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

Old subthreads
Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#781

Post by Clarence »

Mykeru wrote:
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
If I wanted to fuck a 13-year old girl, I'd sell all my possessions, move to Thailand, spend two weeks mainlining whiskey, then cook myself slowly in a pot of water until I died so that a 13-year old girl didn't get fucked by a fucking adult. WTF is it with men who like skinny chicks? I'm guessing latent pedophilia.
3/10. You aren't even trying.
If by 'skinny' you mean runway model heroin chick skinny, I agree with you to a limited extent.
But if you don't understand why most men tend not to be overtly attracted to most BBW's(an abused term if there ever was one) than I feel sorry for you.
Think Zvan. Remove 35 years from her till she is 20 again (or close to 20, she looks 55 plus to me). Keep her current weight and there is still no way she'd be attractive.

As for the rest, I have no qualms about going after a girl 16 or older. That's mid-teens. Hope that's not too 'pedophiliac' for you.

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#782

Post by Clarence »

By the way, I don't pretend that my weight is ideal either.
I'd rather have six pack abs, but baring that I could stand to lose 50 pounds.
I don't repulse most women but I will say they don't think I'm a 'hunk' either.

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#783

Post by Clarence »

welch wrote:
Clarence wrote:
welch wrote: Janet's had a variety of interesting piercings for some years now. None of that was a secret per se, nor her tattoos around her nethers. She's a bit of a wild girl, Janet is, and more power to her. The piercing didn't create intent at all.

The real problem was, unlike Timberlake, she didn't continuously apologize for months. She apologized a couple of times for the accident, and clearly felt that was about what it deserved. But oh no, she didn't grovel, she didn't beg, she didn't promise to become a good amish girl with a collar around her ears, a nice modest cap, and skirts to her ankles. So she was ratfucked over it. Lost a movie part or two, you name it.

Meanwhile, Timberlake, who begged forgiveness constantly? patted on the head and told "that's okay, you little scamp."

Completely fucking disgusting it was, the way she was treated over it. You want to see slut-shaming in action? There you go.
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
I don't think either of them owed more than an 'oopsie', if that. More to the point, football is a game mostly enjoyed by teens and adults neither of which would have been harmed had her chest been bare (or Justin's for that matter) for the whole performance. Little kids (and I'm not sure what harm seeing boobies could do to them either) can be kept away, indeed, wasn't the Halftime show if I recall correctly around 9pm at night or thereabouts when many of the little scamps would normally be in bed?

Female sexual jealousy explains tons of things when it concerns are sexual mores as does male protectiveness and possessiveness from times past. But this was a flash of boob, and I don't think those explanations can apply here . I think the whole thing was more about control for controls sake by certain (mostly Christian in this case) groups.

Why was it Janet's game? Why not his?
Are you claiming he sexually assaulted Janet Jackson?
A powerful pop culture icon? And she took all that shit and didn't even try to get back at him ?

I don't think Timberlake is crazy. That was either an accident or it was planned between both of them.

Karmakin
.
.
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:49 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#784

Post by Karmakin »

Clarence wrote:
welch wrote: Janet's had a variety of interesting piercings for some years now. None of that was a secret per se, nor her tattoos around her nethers. She's a bit of a wild girl, Janet is, and more power to her. The piercing didn't create intent at all.

The real problem was, unlike Timberlake, she didn't continuously apologize for months. She apologized a couple of times for the accident, and clearly felt that was about what it deserved. But oh no, she didn't grovel, she didn't beg, she didn't promise to become a good amish girl with a collar around her ears, a nice modest cap, and skirts to her ankles. So she was ratfucked over it. Lost a movie part or two, you name it.

Meanwhile, Timberlake, who begged forgiveness constantly? patted on the head and told "that's okay, you little scamp."

Completely fucking disgusting it was, the way she was treated over it. You want to see slut-shaming in action? There you go.
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
I don't think either of them owed more than an 'oopsie', if that. More to the point, football is a game mostly enjoyed by teens and adults neither of which would have been harmed had her chest been bare (or Justin's for that matter) for the whole performance. Little kids (and I'm not sure what harm seeing boobies could do to them either) can be kept away, indeed, wasn't the Halftime show if I recall correctly around 9pm at night or thereabouts when many of the little scamps would normally be in bed?

Female sexual jealousy explains tons of things when it concerns are sexual mores as does male protectiveness and possessiveness from times past. But this was a flash of boob, and I don't think those explanations can apply here . I think the whole thing was more about control for controls sake by certain (mostly Christian in this case) groups.
I don't agree with you a lot Clarence, but this is one case where I do. I wouldn't use the word jealousy, but there's certainly a very highly competitive social and sexual hierarchy among women which is where I think a lot of what the SJL calls "misogyny" really comes from. One thing I've heard repeatedly is that in Conservative Christian Protestant churches women hold a lot more of the power than we normally think.

When you look at it from this light, a lot of the agenda of the Christian Right is about this sort of sexual/social hierarchy. Both abortion AND homosexuality (with, to be honest the focus on male homosexuality as they "cut" women out of the picture) can be seen as maintaining this sexual/social hierarchy via controlling sexual availability.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/1dd66918e652 ... 1_1280.jpg

It's a bit harsh, but I think there's a lot of truth to it. In reality, the social/sexual hierarchy among women is one of the most powerful social and cultural forces that we have in our society. And in all this discussion about gender, it almost entirely gets ignored.

Karmakin
.
.
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:49 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#785

Post by Karmakin »

Oh, and regarding controlling sexual hierarchy, don't look any further to the debates over sex work, where there's a fuckton of people who want "reforms" that actually serve to tighten the reigns, I.E. the Nordic model. Something that both religious AND feminist groups want.

Should tell you everything you need to know right there.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#786

Post by Tribble »

Martin Robbins
4 January 2014 at 3:09 pm (UTC -6) Link to this comment
Re: David: “… Živković has said as little as he thought was possible, and it got neither him nor his victims anywhere. Explanation, coming clean on everything, is the only hope.”

This is what bugs me the most about the whole thing. There’s been a pattern among Bora and his supporters of minimising or glossing over what he did. Supporters have suggested that there were only a couple of incidents, or described his actions as ‘inappropriate comments’, or similar (Zuiker’s post is almost Orwellian on this). Bora himself lied about the extent of his problem in his original apologies, then erased the incidents from his review of the year, then tried to isolate the three women involved from the rest of the community when he eventually posted an ‘apology’. He continues now to tweet away essentially as if nothing had happened, making only the barest possible concessions at each step, and praising the friends who write these history-altering bullshit narratives about him.

I would have a lot more time for him if he:
a) publicly called out people like Zuiker who were spinning false narratives about what he did;
b) set out in brutally honest terms a proper admission of what he did;
c) apologised sincerely for that,
and d) explained the steps he is taking to ensure he is not in a position to ever do the same again.

I’m not saying those things would magically change my opinion of the guy overnight, but they would at least show that he understood and accepted that he had a problem that needed dealing with.
Fucking, Christ. This was a business and personal matter. It was NOT FOR YOUR FUCKING PUBLIC CONSUMPTION and you have NO FUCKING RIGHTS TO TELL ANYONE INVOLVED WHAT THEY SHOULD DO, YOU RUBBER-NECKING VAMPIRE!

Sorry, just had to get that off my chest...

Also, coming from the perspective of having been a professional witness providing expert testimony, including rebuttal testimony, in my day, I have to remain skeptical of the full claim as I only saw a 'slice' of the communications. I very well recognize that a person making the charges will put on the best possible case and tend to leave-out the exculpatory information and spin what information they do release in the most negative light possible. And without full disclosure of ALL relevant emails, final judgment is best reserved instead of rushed into.

It's like that "Michael Shermer is a rapist because he refilled my wine glass" woman. He didn't refill her wine glass. She was at a public function with an open bar and there were servers who refilled her wine glass. She got drunk and Shermer didn't have a damn thing to do with it. And the whole incident, where she got totally pissed and had to be taken home by a friend, was well known and on the JREF forums where she (herself) said she had a great time, but drank too much.

Yet, if we take her very edited and recast "Shermer is a Rapist" bandwagon jumping claim as 'truth,' we might think "Oh, there must be something to it, because we have this supporting story..." When, in fact, it was just out-of-context and deliberately mis-stated load of horse-crap because she had to have a share of the spotlight.

Which gets me to my next point. All this Bora stuff happened during the Shermer, Krauss, etc. feeding frenzy. A period when accusations and counter accusations of horrible male conduct were flying, from the SJW brigade, fast-and-furious.
So, yeah, having seen to the lows the SJW and Professional Victim crowd goes to twist everything into abuse and victimzation...

I can't help but wonder how much of this was recast for a moment in the spotlight. I also wonder how much of this is Bora being Bora and has he ever had the kinds of conversations with men. Because if he has, then it really is a big, fat nothing. If not, well, it's inappropriate in a work environment and some type of censure by his employer was appropriate.

However, the fucking Internet SJW Goon Squad is owed nothing and Bora has every right to rebuild his life without another goddamn apology. But if any of you lurking assholes want one, here's a sincere one from me, on Bora's behalf:

FUCK YOU.
That is all...

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#787

Post by rayshul »

Hey Karmakin do you have a straight link to that comic? :) I love it.

It's something I see so often - that these women who preach feminism of the SJW ilk really want to control other women and how they behave. My recent facebook fight was about this - pointing out the hypocrisy of "feminist" women who hate women. Women who buy into this shit are those who are threatened or angry at other women for getting benefits.

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#788

Post by Clarence »

Karmakin wrote:
Clarence wrote:
welch wrote: Janet's had a variety of interesting piercings for some years now. None of that was a secret per se, nor her tattoos around her nethers. She's a bit of a wild girl, Janet is, and more power to her. The piercing didn't create intent at all.

The real problem was, unlike Timberlake, she didn't continuously apologize for months. She apologized a couple of times for the accident, and clearly felt that was about what it deserved. But oh no, she didn't grovel, she didn't beg, she didn't promise to become a good amish girl with a collar around her ears, a nice modest cap, and skirts to her ankles. So she was ratfucked over it. Lost a movie part or two, you name it.

Meanwhile, Timberlake, who begged forgiveness constantly? patted on the head and told "that's okay, you little scamp."

Completely fucking disgusting it was, the way she was treated over it. You want to see slut-shaming in action? There you go.
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
I don't think either of them owed more than an 'oopsie', if that. More to the point, football is a game mostly enjoyed by teens and adults neither of which would have been harmed had her chest been bare (or Justin's for that matter) for the whole performance. Little kids (and I'm not sure what harm seeing boobies could do to them either) can be kept away, indeed, wasn't the Halftime show if I recall correctly around 9pm at night or thereabouts when many of the little scamps would normally be in bed?

Female sexual jealousy explains tons of things when it concerns are sexual mores as does male protectiveness and possessiveness from times past. But this was a flash of boob, and I don't think those explanations can apply here . I think the whole thing was more about control for controls sake by certain (mostly Christian in this case) groups.
I don't agree with you a lot Clarence, but this is one case where I do. I wouldn't use the word jealousy, but there's certainly a very highly competitive social and sexual hierarchy among women which is where I think a lot of what the SJL calls "misogyny" really comes from. One thing I've heard repeatedly is that in Conservative Christian Protestant churches women hold a lot more of the power than we normally think.

When you look at it from this light, a lot of the agenda of the Christian Right is about this sort of sexual/social hierarchy. Both abortion AND homosexuality (with, to be honest the focus on male homosexuality as they "cut" women out of the picture) can be seen as maintaining this sexual/social hierarchy via controlling sexual availability.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/1dd66918e652 ... 1_1280.jpg

It's a bit harsh, but I think there's a lot of truth to it. In reality, the social/sexual hierarchy among women is one of the most powerful social and cultural forces that we have in our society. And in all this discussion about gender, it almost entirely gets ignored.
Well, as the Christian marriage blogger (and I think probably THE marriage blogger on the entire web even though I've been on blogs and talked to people who do things like the National Marriage Survey)Dalrock talks about this alot. How most mainline churches consist of disproportionate amounts of women who contribute a disproportionate amount of the funding and hence tend to set doctrinal agendas.

But there is another elephant in the room and that is the older/younger women dynamic. Mostly women in the mid 30's to mid 50s versus all younger women for men. That partly explains the hysterical campaigns (esp in Britain) against "Page 3" girls and the like , the ever raising age of consent and the ever tightening penalties for violating it, most of the 'war on porn' and etc.

Females have agency. They are just very very good at denying it. Hence why 99 percent plus of all of feminisms (people like Paglia being an exception) 'patriarchy' complaints are bullshit. Slut shaming is done at least as much (and honestly I think most studies would show much more)by women as by men, but it is men who are always supposed to take the blame and solve women's problems unilaterally.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#789

Post by rayshul »

Found the comic, don't worry. :)

I don't think it's an older/younger dynamic. Most of the poison seems to come out of young women who've been in college. The most toxic shit I see at the moment is barfing out of the mouths of 20 somethings.

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#790

Post by Clarence »

rayshul wrote:Found the comic, don't worry. :)

I don't think it's an older/younger dynamic. Most of the poison seems to come out of young women who've been in college. The most toxic shit I see at the moment is barfing out of the mouths of 20 somethings.
I'm thinking in terms of laws and policies and what mostly *older, not OLD* feminist bloggers say. Look at most of the feminists pushing the laws in Britain and the EU and they tend to be middle aged (in the 40 plus sense) or older. Same with lots of the ones in policy making positions in the US.

Younger woman SJW's of course have their own agendas. Slut shame another woman, you might get that man instead of her, you might save YOUR 'rep' at her expense, etc.

They have their own place at the SJW party, but with the exception of some of the third wave sex pozzies(sex positive on a particular type of feminist terms of course), most of the younger women have no place at the table where actual politics gets done.

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#791

Post by Clarence »

Tribble, your most recent post was awesome.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#792

Post by welch »

Clarence wrote:
welch wrote:
Clarence wrote:
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
I don't think either of them owed more than an 'oopsie', if that. More to the point, football is a game mostly enjoyed by teens and adults neither of which would have been harmed had her chest been bare (or Justin's for that matter) for the whole performance. Little kids (and I'm not sure what harm seeing boobies could do to them either) can be kept away, indeed, wasn't the Halftime show if I recall correctly around 9pm at night or thereabouts when many of the little scamps would normally be in bed?

Female sexual jealousy explains tons of things when it concerns are sexual mores as does male protectiveness and possessiveness from times past. But this was a flash of boob, and I don't think those explanations can apply here . I think the whole thing was more about control for controls sake by certain (mostly Christian in this case) groups.

Why was it Janet's game? Why not his?
Are you claiming he sexually assaulted Janet Jackson?
A powerful pop culture icon? And she took all that shit and didn't even try to get back at him ?

I don't think Timberlake is crazy. That was either an accident or it was planned between both of them.
No, I just am taking issue with your claiming that somehow it was her idea and he just "went along with it" barring actual proof. Both of them have, whenever asked, claimed it was an accident. I have yet to see any reason to think otherwise.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#793

Post by BarnOwl »

Justin Timberlake can be forgiven at least a few transgressions for being part of this:

[youtube]6WmTlHvTSm4[/youtube]

:lol:

1. Cut a hole in the box ....

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#794

Post by Clarence »

welch wrote:
No, I just am taking issue with your claiming that somehow it was her idea and he just "went along with it" barring actual proof. Both of them have, whenever asked, claimed it was an accident. I have yet to see any reason to think otherwise.
I think you misunderstood me because it never occurred to me to even think that if it was planned, it wouldn't have been approved by both of them. And more, I wouldn't care if it was HIS idea OR HER idea because I think the reaction to it was way over the top and uncalled for. I was not attaching 'blame' to either one, nor was I in any way, shape or form saying JJ deserved (even if it had been her idea entirely) what happened to her. I saw the most powerful nation on earth go apeshit over a very fast flash of a single boob, and I felt rather sick at the time.

The worst thing is our culture hasn't gotten any better. I think it might even have gotten worse. Why do you think Miley did what she did? Because tame as it was(one might argue it was 'tasteless' as well) she knew she'd get a shit-ton of attention , and not just from the curious and horny, but from the people who make it their business to police what we do with our sexualities. Miley wouldn't have DARED to have a breast accident. Not after what happened to Janet.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#795

Post by another lurker »

rayshul wrote:Hey Karmakin do you have a straight link to that comic? :) I love it.

It's something I see so often - that these women who preach feminism of the SJW ilk really want to control other women and how they behave. My recent facebook fight was about this - pointing out the hypocrisy of "feminist" women who hate women. Women who buy into this shit are those who are threatened or angry at other women for getting benefits.

I posted this study once before, but you assholes ignored it. Not you Rayhsul, just in general:P

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi ... ss/281657/
Vaillancourt had always been interested in bullying and popularity, but to her, this showed that women tend to haze each other simply for looking promiscuous.
Psychologists Roy Baumeister and Jean Twenge have also theorized that women, not men, are largely the ones who suppress each others’ sexualities, in part through this sort of indirect aggression.

“The evidence favors the view that women have worked to stifle each other’s sexuality because sex is a limited resource that women use to negotiate with men, and scarcity gives women an advantage,” they wrote.
n his book, The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating, Buss argues that women do this because, evolutionarily, women who are willing to have casual sex undermine the goals of women who want long-term relationships. "Slutty" women hint to men that it’s okay not to commit because there will always be someone available to give away the milk for free, as it were. Their peers' “derogation” is thus intended to damage the reputation of these free-wheeling females.
But even Campbell stresses that it’s hard to tell whether this phenomenon is evolutionarily or culturally driven.
Still, something to think about.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#796

Post by rayshul »

Pfft. I can't help but notice another lurker that you are lack-of-research shaming me. DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND OUR FIGHT IS AGAINST THE MENZ?

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#797

Post by another lurker »

rayshul wrote:Pfft. I can't help but notice another lurker that you are lack-of-research shaming me. DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND OUR FIGHT IS AGAINST THE MENZ?
I am also FRUIT SHAMING you. MINE R BIGGER!

(but Ophie's face is attached, so no :cdc: )

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#798

Post by rayshul »


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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#799

Post by another lurker »


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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#800

Post by Mykeru »

Clarence wrote:
I don't repulse most women
Only because you haven't met most women.

:cdc:
download/file.php?avatar=764_1369014754.jpg

:rimshot:

Karmakin
.
.
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:49 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#801

Post by Karmakin »

rayshul wrote:Hey Karmakin do you have a straight link to that comic? :) I love it.

It's something I see so often - that these women who preach feminism of the SJW ilk really want to control other women and how they behave. My recent facebook fight was about this - pointing out the hypocrisy of "feminist" women who hate women. Women who buy into this shit are those who are threatened or angry at other women for getting benefits.
I think there's a bit more to things than that. Women have significantly more social power than men do in our society, for whatever reason, and they know how to use it.

Women:

http://media.giphy.com/media/4lxsEDn0XQzFS/giphy.gif

Men:

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/ ... 490n25.gif

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6440
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#802

Post by Really? »

another lurker wrote:Since we are discussing hotties, she really was quite beautiful:

http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/515 ... er2of2.jpg

http://cocorivers.files.wordpress.com/2 ... -baker.jpg
Here's the thing. I happen to be white, basically. Therefore, if I find her attractive, am I appropriating her culture? Am I othering her and playing into the archetype of the hypersexual savage?

Or if I don't find her attractive, am I racist for excluding her from my desires based upon race?

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK!!!!1!

Karmakin
.
.
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:49 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#803

Post by Karmakin »

Of course, to make it clear, not all women use social weapon like a sword like that. There's a lot of awesome women out there (and especially in here!)

But it really is prevalent enough that it's a big social/cultural thing, and IMO it really does cause a lot of harm for a lot of people.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#804

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Git wrote:
Gumby wrote:Southern is always annoyed. That's kinda his thing.
She. She's a she.
All I can say is, Another Lurker better be a girl, or I'm gonna be pretty damned embarrassed about all that sexting via the PM.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#805

Post by rayshul »

I personally think it's awesome that critical race theory, the ultimate lefty political position, is totally against racial mixing.

Rumour has it that Josephine had a white daddy.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#806

Post by Mykeru »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Git wrote:
Gumby wrote:Southern is always annoyed. That's kinda his thing.
She. She's a she.
All I can say is, Another Lurker better be a girl, or I'm gonna be pretty damned embarrassed about all that sexting via the PM.
Do they know your gay porn video was leaked?

http://www.2guys1horse.com/index.html

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#807

Post by welch »

Clarence wrote:
welch wrote:
No, I just am taking issue with your claiming that somehow it was her idea and he just "went along with it" barring actual proof. Both of them have, whenever asked, claimed it was an accident. I have yet to see any reason to think otherwise.
I think you misunderstood me because it never occurred to me to even think that if it was planned, it wouldn't have been approved by both of them. And more, I wouldn't care if it was HIS idea OR HER idea because I think the reaction to it was way over the top and uncalled for. I was not attaching 'blame' to either one, nor was I in any way, shape or form saying JJ deserved (even if it had been her idea entirely) what happened to her. I saw the most powerful nation on earth go apeshit over a very fast flash of a single boob, and I felt rather sick at the time.

The worst thing is our culture hasn't gotten any better. I think it might even have gotten worse. Why do you think Miley did what she did? Because tame as it was(one might argue it was 'tasteless' as well) she knew she'd get a shit-ton of attention , and not just from the curious and horny, but from the people who make it their business to police what we do with our sexualities. Miley wouldn't have DARED to have a breast accident. Not after what happened to Janet.
I didn't misunderstand what you wrote. you may not have wrote what you meant, but I really didn't misunderstand what you wrote. Here:
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
What you said was pretty clear. If it wasn't an accident, then he was merely in on *Janet's* game. (emphasis mine)

You may not have meant that, but that is what you wrote, those are your words. Those words, and their rather clear meaning, are what I took issue with.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#808

Post by Mykeru »

Attention: This link is not to be clicked under any circumstances.

http://goo.gl/hUzF5S

However, if you are reading the SlymePit at work, celebrate your lack of work ethic by making sure your speakers are plugged in with the volume way up.

Thank you.

http://manhattaninfidel.org/wp-content/ ... mr.-ed.jpg

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#809

Post by Mykeru »

welch wrote:
Clarence wrote:
welch wrote:
No, I just am taking issue with your claiming that somehow it was her idea and he just "went along with it" barring actual proof. Both of them have, whenever asked, claimed it was an accident. I have yet to see any reason to think otherwise.
I think you misunderstood me because it never occurred to me to even think that if it was planned, it wouldn't have been approved by both of them. And more, I wouldn't care if it was HIS idea OR HER idea because I think the reaction to it was way over the top and uncalled for. I was not attaching 'blame' to either one, nor was I in any way, shape or form saying JJ deserved (even if it had been her idea entirely) what happened to her. I saw the most powerful nation on earth go apeshit over a very fast flash of a single boob, and I felt rather sick at the time.

The worst thing is our culture hasn't gotten any better. I think it might even have gotten worse. Why do you think Miley did what she did? Because tame as it was(one might argue it was 'tasteless' as well) she knew she'd get a shit-ton of attention , and not just from the curious and horny, but from the people who make it their business to police what we do with our sexualities. Miley wouldn't have DARED to have a breast accident. Not after what happened to Janet.
I didn't misunderstand what you wrote. you may not have wrote what you meant, but I really didn't misunderstand what you wrote. Here:
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
What you said was pretty clear. If it wasn't an accident, then he was merely in on *Janet's* game. (emphasis mine)

You may not have meant that, but that is what you wrote, those are your words. Those words, and their rather clear meaning, are what I took issue with.
I vaguely remember the incident. Didn't Timberlake try to fine-tune Jackson's nipple piercing using a screwdriver?

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#810

Post by Clarence »

Mykeru wrote:
Clarence wrote:
I don't repulse most women
Only because you haven't met most women.

:cdc:
download/file.php?avatar=764_1369014754.jpg

:rimshot:
Touche! :clap:

Clarence
.
.
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#811

Post by Clarence »

welch wrote:
Clarence wrote:
welch wrote:
No, I just am taking issue with your claiming that somehow it was her idea and he just "went along with it" barring actual proof. Both of them have, whenever asked, claimed it was an accident. I have yet to see any reason to think otherwise.
I think you misunderstood me because it never occurred to me to even think that if it was planned, it wouldn't have been approved by both of them. And more, I wouldn't care if it was HIS idea OR HER idea because I think the reaction to it was way over the top and uncalled for. I was not attaching 'blame' to either one, nor was I in any way, shape or form saying JJ deserved (even if it had been her idea entirely) what happened to her. I saw the most powerful nation on earth go apeshit over a very fast flash of a single boob, and I felt rather sick at the time.

The worst thing is our culture hasn't gotten any better. I think it might even have gotten worse. Why do you think Miley did what she did? Because tame as it was(one might argue it was 'tasteless' as well) she knew she'd get a shit-ton of attention , and not just from the curious and horny, but from the people who make it their business to police what we do with our sexualities. Miley wouldn't have DARED to have a breast accident. Not after what happened to Janet.
I didn't misunderstand what you wrote. you may not have wrote what you meant, but I really didn't misunderstand what you wrote. Here:
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
What you said was pretty clear. If it wasn't an accident, then he was merely in on *Janet's* game. (emphasis mine)

You may not have meant that, but that is what you wrote, those are your words. Those words, and their rather clear meaning, are what I took issue with.
Except those words aren't as 'clear' as you rather think they are. That is, you seem to think they somehow preclude real collaboration between the two people involved or that they imply some sort of moral judgement. They do neither, though I do think it was more likely her idea than his(for various reasons) and her 'game' in that case would be attention, though she might have underestimated the amount of negative versus positive publicity she would receive.

But in fact whether planned or not , her idea or his, doesn't really matter. As I made clear in my prior posts it was the overreaction by certain segments of society that concerned me and not some moral judgement of two people who might merely have been victims of an unfortunate accident.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#812

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Clarence wrote:
Jan Steen wrote:Sorry, Tribble, but even your own examples work against you. Pick four random people from any one of your photos and calculate the probability that they are all young white women. No, I'll make it easier for you, pick two. Go ahead.

But this is not how Bora picked his panel. He did not choose from a class of students, he selected from a global pool of people who were already active in science blogging. In his own words:



Still don't see any bias in the outcome?
This is a bit unfair, Jan. It's seeing bias of a certain type, where we can't even be sure any bias at all exists, though I'd bet two things:
A. There were even 'hotter' women he COULD have picked, but didn't for some reason.
B. The bias towards promoting more women into these positions was at play here to at least an extent.

I'm willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.
I fail to see how guessing about the potential talent pool sheds light one way or the other. There may indeed have been some stunning talent to pick from, but there could have been other criteria at play such as whether or not the candidate told Bora to fuck off.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#813

Post by welch »

Clarence wrote:
welch wrote:
Clarence wrote:
I think you misunderstood me because it never occurred to me to even think that if it was planned, it wouldn't have been approved by both of them. And more, I wouldn't care if it was HIS idea OR HER idea because I think the reaction to it was way over the top and uncalled for. I was not attaching 'blame' to either one, nor was I in any way, shape or form saying JJ deserved (even if it had been her idea entirely) what happened to her. I saw the most powerful nation on earth go apeshit over a very fast flash of a single boob, and I felt rather sick at the time.

The worst thing is our culture hasn't gotten any better. I think it might even have gotten worse. Why do you think Miley did what she did? Because tame as it was(one might argue it was 'tasteless' as well) she knew she'd get a shit-ton of attention , and not just from the curious and horny, but from the people who make it their business to police what we do with our sexualities. Miley wouldn't have DARED to have a breast accident. Not after what happened to Janet.
I didn't misunderstand what you wrote. you may not have wrote what you meant, but I really didn't misunderstand what you wrote. Here:
Well, with Timberlake, what do you want? If it was an accident, he, like you said, constantly groveled. If it wasn't an accident(which I lean towards suspecting) than he was merely in on Janet's game.
What you said was pretty clear. If it wasn't an accident, then he was merely in on *Janet's* game. (emphasis mine)

You may not have meant that, but that is what you wrote, those are your words. Those words, and their rather clear meaning, are what I took issue with.
Except those words aren't as 'clear' as you rather think they are. That is, you seem to think they somehow preclude real collaboration between the two people involved or that they imply some sort of moral judgement. They do neither, though I do think it was more likely her idea than his(for various reasons) and her 'game' in that case would be attention, though she might have underestimated the amount of negative versus positive publicity she would receive.

But in fact whether planned or not , her idea or his, doesn't really matter. As I made clear in my prior posts it was the overreaction by certain segments of society that concerned me and not some moral judgement of two people who might merely have been victims of an unfortunate accident.
I was so wrong except you just said that if it weren't an accident, you think it was her idea more than his. (which is what I said that you'd said. So, obviously, I didn't misread your words. I didn't apply any moral intent either. That's your own projection.) You think it was her idea more than his based on what, exactly?

John Greg
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#814

Post by John Greg »

BarnOwl said:
Halloween is a big deal here, though - I remember it being pretty much destroyed for several years when I was a kid, by a greedy psychopath who poisoned his own kids and some neighbor kids with cyanide-laced pixie stix. He did it for life insurance money, apparently. It was horrible and tragic - what a sick bastard.
Um, he killed one kid: his own kid in his own home. It was an attorney (or someone else) who decided, and eventually propogandized it into "the guy who killed Halloween".

link: http://murderpedia.org/male.O/o1/obryan ... -clark.htm

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#815

Post by Ape+lust »

Well, there goes UCLA. US K-12 schools are stuck in a perpetual state of suck, justice leaguers will finish the job on higher learning. Get ready for the no-job-having degreed Privilege Checkers bubble.
Until 2011, students majoring in English at UCLA had to take one course in Chaucer, two in Shakespeare, and one in Milton —the cornerstones of English literature. Following a revolt of the junior faculty, however, during which it was announced that Shakespeare was part of the "Empire," UCLA junked these individual author requirements. It replaced them with a mandate that all English majors take a total of three courses in the following four areas: Gender, Race, Ethnicity, Disability and Sexuality Studies; Imperial, Transnational, and Postcolonial Studies; genre studies, interdisciplinary studies, and critical theory; or creative writing.

...

Such defenestrations have happened elsewhere, and long before 2011. But the UCLA coup was particularly significant because the school's English department was one of the last champions of the historically informed study of great literature, uncorrupted by an ideological overlay. Precisely for that reason, it was the most popular English major in the country, enrolling a whopping 1,400 undergraduates.

The UCLA coup represents the characteristic academic traits of our time: narcissism, an obsession with victimhood, and a relentless determination to reduce the stunning complexity of the past to the shallow categories of identity and class politics. Sitting atop an entire civilization of aesthetic wonders, the contemporary academic wants only to study oppression, preferably his or her own, defined reductively according to gonads and melanin.

...

...A recent Harvard report from a committee co-chaired by the school's premier postcolonial studies theorist, Homi Bhabha, lamented that 57% of incoming Harvard students who initially declare interest in a humanities major eventually change concentrations.

http://archive.is/8e4z2
http://imgur.com/kns2B1f.jpg

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#816

Post by Guest »

The hair on the first one is too flat, the second tend to smile too widely, the third has a forehead that's 1cm longer than optimal and the fourth has a waist-to-hip ratio that is too low even for a woman.

Plus from other pics I've seen they have slightly sharp knees and elbows.

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#817

Post by Guest »

JacquesCuze wrote:she loves to mock idiots.
It's true, Alkon does make a mockery of herself regularly.

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#818

Post by JacquesCuze »

Ape+lust wrote:Well, there goes UCLA. US K-12 schools are stuck in a perpetual state of suck, justice leaguers will finish the job on higher learning. Get ready for the no-job-having degreed Privilege Checkers bubble.
http://imgur.com/kns2B1f.jpg
The good part of Obamacare is that she should be able to get health insurance on her own.

So all in all, I don't understand why she doesn't use her degree in Women's Studies to open up an upscale mall sex store kiosk.

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#819

Post by JacquesCuze »

Guest wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:she loves to mock idiots.
It's true, Alkon does make a mockery of herself regularly.
You can disagree with her but you have to admit that she is fearless in speaking her mind and fearless in backing that speech up with her name.

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#820

Post by Guest »

JacquesCuze wrote:You can disagree with her but you have to admit that she is fearless in speaking her mind and fearless in backing that speech up with her name.
Agreed. Much like PZ Myers and unlike most of the slymepit. :lol:

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#821

Post by JacquesCuze »

Guest wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:You can disagree with her but you have to admit that she is fearless in speaking her mind and fearless in backing that speech up with her name.
Agreed. Much like PZ Myers and unlike most of the slymepit. :lol:
I think it's pretty clear from his reliance on banning people, placing them in his dungeon and on the thuggish commenters he encourages to police the speech on his blog that PZ Myers is far from fearless in speaking his mind.

OTOH, if you read Amy's blog one thing that shines through is how many different opinions are expressed there and how everyone for the most part gets along without a need for character assassination, whining, bullying, or a call for bannings and doxings.

I am one of the first proponents of anonymity, and commented here for a long time as a guest, but it is reasonable to point out your hypocrisy commenting as guest while attacking members of the pit as fearful of using their names. And most of the most outspoken pit members are widely identifiable IRL.

And thanks to Pit mores, there is again, almost no banning and almost complete freedom of expression here. No editing of comments, no deletion of comments, and almost no bannings ever except in the most extreme case. (Lsuoma can supply details if he wishes.)

That is far from the fearful speech of PZ Myers or any of the Free Thought Bloggers that I have visited.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#822

Post by Badger3k »

JacquesCuze wrote:
Guest wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:You can disagree with her but you have to admit that she is fearless in speaking her mind and fearless in backing that speech up with her name.
Agreed. Much like PZ Myers and unlike most of the slymepit. :lol:
I think it's pretty clear from his reliance on banning people, placing them in his dungeon and on the thuggish commenters he encourages to police the speech on his blog that PZ Myers is far from fearless in speaking his mind.

OTOH, if you read Amy's blog one thing that shines through is how many different opinions are expressed there and how everyone for the most part gets along without a need for character assassination, whining, bullying, or a call for bannings and doxings.

I am one of the first proponents of anonymity, and commented here for a long time as a guest, but it is reasonable to point out your hypocrisy commenting as guest while attacking members of the pit as fearful of using their names. And most of the most outspoken pit members are widely identifiable IRL.

And thanks to Pit mores, there is again, almost no banning and almost complete freedom of expression here. No editing of comments, no deletion of comments, and almost no bannings ever except in the most extreme case. (Lsuoma can supply details if he wishes.)

That is far from the fearful speech of PZ Myers or any of the Free Thought Bloggers that I have visited.
PZ is only fearless when he controls who can say what - everywhere else, he's backed off. When he and his sycophants attacked Rationalia, where PZ was a member, he actually showed up for a few posts, couldn't handle it and left, but not before asking his name to be removed from the members list. His actions against Gelato guy (and others) are the same - speak loudly on a blog where he controls everything, but in real life...not so much. He's a paper tiger - a milquetoast - in real life. Considering these psychos have cost people their jobs and livelihood, it's just being safe to be as anonymous as you can or want to be - hmm...unless that is victim blaming? Maybe we just need to teach PZ not to go after people's lives?

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#823

Post by Old_ones »

Mykeru wrote:
Old_ones wrote:
Mykeru wrote:The idea of calling someone "rude", i.e., "brusque" on Twitter is ridiculous.

Also, is Bora Zivkovic Serbian? I tried to look it up but couldn't find his origins. If his original language is Serbian, or some other member of the Slavic language groups then the language itself could sound "rude" to western ears. (snip)
Yeah, Bora lists himself as Serbian (Yugoslavia at the time) by birth. http://coturnix.org/
Obviously a product of a privileged upbringing by the doting communist government in Yugoslavia under noted humanitarian Marshall Tito before the newly independent utopian states of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Montenegro, Croatia, etc. whereas his victims had life-long struggles as middle-classed white women under the heel of the patriarchal slut-shaming regimes of North America.

Am I doing it right?
LOL, yeah, something like that. But don't forget that in addition to having utopia privilege, Bora is a male, so when he was living in Yugoslavia/the places it turned into, he was clearly running the place. Also keep in mind that men get extra privileges in war zones. Sometimes they are given medals.

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#824

Post by Guest »

JacquesCuze wrote:it is reasonable to point out your hypocrisy commenting as guest while attacking members of the pit as fearful of using their names.
That's every slymepitter's wet dream: to be able to reasonably cry hypocrisy at the slightest indication. :lol:

But I didn't exclude me neither did I attack the pit members. I merely thought that your point was lacking. So she onymously spouts drivel that a lot of people lap up and that helps her drive her book sales in turn. Ok, big deal, I'll give that to her.

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#825

Post by JacquesCuze »

Guest wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:it is reasonable to point out your hypocrisy commenting as guest while attacking members of the pit as fearful of using their names.
That's every slymepitter's wet dream: to be able to reasonably cry hypocrisy at the slightest indication. :lol:

But I didn't exclude me neither did I attack the pit members. I merely thought that your point was lacking. So she onymously spouts drivel that a lot of people lap up and that helps her drive her book sales in turn. Ok, big deal, I'll give that to her.
Then you agree with me, Chris Clarke demonstrated his ignorance of Alkon and his unethical willingness to slur people he disagrees with when he claimed she was responsible for the pseudonymous @ripplesofdoubt twitter account.

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#826

Post by Guest »

JacquesCuze wrote:
I think it's pretty clear from his reliance on banning people, placing them in his dungeon and on the thuggish commenters he encourages to police the speech on his blog that PZ Myers is far from fearless in speaking his mind.

OTOH, if you read Amy's blog one thing that shines through is how many different opinions are expressed there and how everyone for the most part gets along without a need for character assassination, whining, bullying, or a call for bannings and doxings.
Unconvincing, Myers doesn't control the narrative outside his blog, hence the slymepit. His policing is extremely limited.

Also, no doxxing? http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2 ... he_ta.html

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#827

Post by Guest »

JacquesCuze wrote:Then you agree with me, Chris Clarke demonstrated his ignorance of Alkon and his unethical willingness to slur people he disagrees with when he claimed she was responsible for the pseudonymous @ripplesofdoubt twitter account.
I don't give a shit about Clarke and his nonsense in the first place. It's not like that's the part I commented on.

Søren Lilholt
.
.
Posts: 1025
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:41 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#828

Post by Søren Lilholt »

John D wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:
Without more knowledge, I will give the parents a well deserved benefit of the doubt that they are good parents and understand their children and that they know that no harm is done.
Yeah.... could be that I am too sensitive to this sort of thing.
They are parents who find it funny to make their children cry for their own amusement. They are therefore cunts.

Fuck "benefit of the doubt".

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#829

Post by JacquesCuze »

Guest wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:Then you agree with me, Chris Clarke demonstrated his ignorance of Alkon and his unethical willingness to slur people he disagrees with when he claimed she was responsible for the pseudonymous @ripplesofdoubt twitter account.
I don't give a shit about Clarke and his nonsense in the first place. It's not like that's the part I commented on.
Okay, so let's recap:

1. You don't care that Chris Clarke was full of shit, that's unimportant to you.
2. You don't think PZ's banning policies and bullying at his website indicates he is fearful of free speech.
3. You agree that regardless of any other claim, Amy Alkon is fearless in associating her name with her actions.
4. The only important part of it to you was to make it known that you think Amy Alkon says dumb things at times.

Okay, whatever dude. I hope you found the conversation of value.

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#830

Post by Guest »

JacquesCuze wrote:4. The only important part of it to you was to make it known that you think Amy Alkon says dumb things at times.
Damn, this guy gets it.

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#831

Post by JacquesCuze »

Søren Lilholt wrote:
John D wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:
Without more knowledge, I will give the parents a well deserved benefit of the doubt that they are good parents and understand their children and that they know that no harm is done.
Yeah.... could be that I am too sensitive to this sort of thing.
They are parents who find it funny to make their children cry for their own amusement. They are therefore cunts.

Fuck "benefit of the doubt".
Oh heavens forbid!

These parents played a 5 minute practical joke on their kids! CUNTS! No reason to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are loving parents.

Call CPS and let's all tumblr about them!

Søren Lilholt
.
.
Posts: 1025
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:41 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#832

Post by Søren Lilholt »

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
Clarence wrote:
Jan Steen wrote:Sorry, Tribble, but even your own examples work against you. Pick four random people from any one of your photos and calculate the probability that they are all young white women. No, I'll make it easier for you, pick two. Go ahead.

But this is not how Bora picked his panel. He did not choose from a class of students, he selected from a global pool of people who were already active in science blogging. In his own words:



Still don't see any bias in the outcome?
This is a bit unfair, Jan. It's seeing bias of a certain type, where we can't even be sure any bias at all exists, though I'd bet two things:
A. There were even 'hotter' women he COULD have picked, but didn't for some reason.
B. The bias towards promoting more women into these positions was at play here to at least an extent.

I'm willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.
I fail to see how guessing about the potential talent pool sheds light one way or the other. There may indeed have been some stunning talent to pick from, but there could have been other criteria at play such as whether or not the candidate told Bora to fuck off.
Yeah - from the accounts I've read it's clear some of these women were sending mixed signals and, however unwittingly, enabling Bora to think he may be able to have sex with them. I imagine this was a much stronger factor than just 'this girl is technically one of the four hottest i've interviewed so i'll pick her'.

Guest

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#833

Post by Guest »

Søren Lilholt wrote:Yeah - from the accounts I've read it's clear some of these women were sending mixed signals and, however unwittingly, enabling Bora to think he may be able to have sex with them. I imagine this was a much stronger factor than just 'this girl is technically one of the four hottest i've interviewed so i'll pick her'.
I wonder if BOOORAAAA himself would enjoy the pathetic nerd explanation, even though he apparently is one.

Søren Lilholt
.
.
Posts: 1025
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:41 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#834

Post by Søren Lilholt »

[quote="JacquesCuze]

Oh heavens forbid!

These parents played a 5 minute practical joke on their kids! CUNTS! No reason to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are loving parents.

Call CPS and let's all tumblr about them![/quote]Deliberately hurting someone enough to make them cry is nasty in any context.

You can love someone and still be a cunt to them.

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

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#835

Post by JackSkeptic »

KiwiInOz wrote:
murtzuphlus wrote:
JackSkeptic wrote: Underline mine. Unlike some places there is no clique or posting requirement to contribute here, as many 'guest' posts will testify to. I was welcome in this dump from day one nearly a year ago. All you need is a thick skin and reluctance to take offense or hold grudges.
Thanks for that. I sort of knew that; it was more an (unhelpful) attempt of not sounding presumptious. Cheers!
He wouldn't feel that way if he heard what we say about him in the back channel.
You leave my back channel alone, prevert.

James Caruthers
.
.
Posts: 6257
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#836

Post by James Caruthers »

Ape+lust wrote:Well, there goes UCLA. US K-12 schools are stuck in a perpetual state of suck, justice leaguers will finish the job on higher learning. Get ready for the no-job-having degreed Privilege Checkers bubble.
Until 2011, students majoring in English at UCLA had to take one course in Chaucer, two in Shakespeare, and one in Milton —the cornerstones of English literature. Following a revolt of the junior faculty, however, during which it was announced that Shakespeare was part of the "Empire," UCLA junked these individual author requirements. It replaced them with a mandate that all English majors take a total of three courses in the following four areas: Gender, Race, Ethnicity, Disability and Sexuality Studies; Imperial, Transnational, and Postcolonial Studies; genre studies, interdisciplinary studies, and critical theory; or creative writing.

...

Such defenestrations have happened elsewhere, and long before 2011. But the UCLA coup was particularly significant because the school's English department was one of the last champions of the historically informed study of great literature, uncorrupted by an ideological overlay. Precisely for that reason, it was the most popular English major in the country, enrolling a whopping 1,400 undergraduates.

The UCLA coup represents the characteristic academic traits of our time: narcissism, an obsession with victimhood, and a relentless determination to reduce the stunning complexity of the past to the shallow categories of identity and class politics. Sitting atop an entire civilization of aesthetic wonders, the contemporary academic wants only to study oppression, preferably his or her own, defined reductively according to gonads and melanin.

...

...A recent Harvard report from a committee co-chaired by the school's premier postcolonial studies theorist, Homi Bhabha, lamented that 57% of incoming Harvard students who initially declare interest in a humanities major eventually change concentrations.

http://archive.is/8e4z2
http://imgur.com/kns2B1f.jpg
This sounds like my university, and this woman sounds like a student at my university.

The amount of fucking useless courses my college has forced me to take is crazy. There's so much bullshit, like "Shakespeare: Radical Feminist Perspective" and "Gender in 18th Century Romantic Literature" and "Queer Trans Otherkin Theory of John Milton." :lol:

Creative writing probably slipped in there as a vehicle for obnoxious SJWs to bitch about how oppressed they are. I took creative nonfiction and that's what it definitely was for some people. My university chugs SJW cock, especially the English department. But fuck, even Anthropology is full of feminist SJWs trying to use dried dung to prove patriarchy and victim status for women who died 10,000 years ago.

James Caruthers
.
.
Posts: 6257
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#837

Post by James Caruthers »

I find it hilarious when college students get USELESS degrees and then bitch that their USELESS degree means they are now unqualified for all the good jobs, and they are now stuck with USELESS jobs.

It's like signing up to be kicked in the balls and then being angry when the nice man shows up to test your scrotum's durability with his boot.

Women's Studies is one of the worst degrees you can pursue in college. A History major who bitched about not being able to get a good job would be laughed at. History majors are the bitches of the humanities departments. The only thing you can do with a degree like History or Women's Studies is teach it. Honestly, becoming a bartender with a Women's Studies degree is pretty fucking good.

Also, it does not cost 60k to get a BA. If you paid that much for a Women's Studies degree, you're a fucking idiot and probably a worthless slacker. I say that because I know a LOT of people at my college who are taking, like, 8 years to get a 4-year degree. These tend to be people in the English/humanities departments. People who started college at 18 and are graduating at 30. :lol:

Do college students need to be educated about the reality of student loans? Sure. Loan companies do their best, but more is needed. Do students need to understand the reality of choosing a major that doesn't earn much money? Sure. BUT... When a woman hits that lady's age, she bears some responsibility for educating herself. She's acting like another butthurt SJW pretend victim. She always had the option to go to a cheaper school or drop out entirely when she realized the value of her degree would not equal the amount of debt she would need to incur.

I'm earning a liberal arts degree. I do not feel entitled to a bundle of money or a great job. I'm taking more practical education within that degree (education which has a real career at the end), but still. It's liberal arts. I'm not going into 60k of debt for my degree, I mean, c'mon. My student loans are going to be way under the national average. I understand spending 50k on becoming a Lawyer, but Women's Studies? :lol:

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#838

Post by Scented Nectar »

Why, oh why, do people who get a degree in "women's studies" think they will find a good job afterwards?

What the fuck does it qualify them for other than unrealistic paranoias?

If I was hiring, I'd throw out any resume that had SJW indicators on it. Why? Because those are the sorts to not want to work, and who DO want to find non-issues to complain about. It would be one malingering lie after another. "Boss, I'm taking 2 months off work because I saw a bad word on twitter, plus someone disagreed with me, and no! you're not getting a doctor's note because they are all patriarchal pricks who keep pretending there's nothing really wrong with me. Oh yeah, also, I saw how you looked at me for one half second the other day. I know (somehow magically) that you were sexualizing me in your mind, so I have blogged about your attempted rape and how you've ruined my life..."

Scunner
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#839

Post by Scunner »

James Caruthers wrote:Creative writing probably slipped in there as a vehicle for obnoxious SJWs to bitch about how oppressed they are. I took creative nonfiction and that's what it definitely was for some people. My university chugs SJW cock, especially the English department. But fuck, even Anthropology is full of feminist SJWs trying to use dried dung to prove patriarchy and victim status for women who died 10,000 years ago.
I've spent a bit of time on writers forums over the last few years, and I've noticed some of the people on them are very, very postmodern. I remember one incident where someone complained about snobby writers. I agreed with them, and I got called out for being a snobby writer because of the way I phrased my agreement. Any attempt to explain my position was ignored in favour of calling me snobby. While I don't know the social views of the users their method of arguing has a lot in common with SJWs, so I wouldn't be surprised if they were.

JacquesCuze
.
.
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:32 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#840

Post by JacquesCuze »

James Caruthers wrote: Women's Studies is one of the worst degrees you can pursue in college. A History major who bitched about not being able to get a good job would be laughed at. History majors are the bitches of the humanities departments. The only thing you can do with a degree like History or Women's Studies is teach it. Honestly, becoming a bartender with a Women's Studies degree is pretty fucking good.

Also, it does not cost 60k to get a BA. If you paid that much for a Women's Studies degree, you're a fucking idiot and probably a worthless slacker. I say that because I know a LOT of people at my college who are taking, like, 8 years to get a 4-year degree. These tend to be people in the English/humanities departments. People who started college at 18 and are graduating at 30. :lol:
It can easily cost that much and more, annual campus tuition, fees, and housing at UC Berkeley for California residents is $33,320, bringing that 4 year degree up to $130K. Shit.

http://www.berkeley.edu/about/fact.shtml

Locked