[GLIBS STAFF NOTE: Whirling vortex of angry moved to moderation – including this note.]
There is a lot of talk about sex (there’s a song in there somewhere) and gender in the news recently. People are using them as basically the same, as completely different, or as “it’s complicated.” My point of view is that it is purposefully and needlessly made more complicated than it needs to be, that there is way too much talk of it, it is not that relevant in the grand scheme of things (it really really, really isn’t, no part of the so called culture war is), and, occasionally, I go the route of “oh my god let’s just drop it already.”
Now this post may be a bit controversial, but hell what is the point of just agreeing with everything? So, of course, here come the disclaimers. This is not a scholarly work and it will not have any reference to studies or other articles. None of my stuff does. I just do op-ed.
I am not a biologist or a neurologist. I am not, thank your deity/empty meaningless void of choice, a social scientist. I am an engineer and, stereotypically, I hold most (not all) social science in disdain. I don’t see them as reliable enough to be fit for purpose, and most of it of little use, besides pushing political agendas. So this is not going to be in any way based on professional experience.
Trigger warning: I am about to state my view of things and I do not care whether people agree with me or find me offensive. It may be long, rambling and incoherent. And I will try to include jokes as I go along, most likely bad ones. You have been warned. Also the spell check keeps trying to get an “u” out of behaviour, but I am keeping that “u” in, so there!
Another thing that I am is an individualist. I believe that the individual is the basic unit of humanity. In my view, only individuals can act and be responsible for their actions, only individuals can have rights and, in the end, individuals suffer when the shit hits the fan. Groups cannot act; they can, at most, try to coordinate their action. I do not believe the group is higher than the individual and I believe a group needs to be seen as simply an aggregation of individuals.
I understand that human brains create categories and, as you cannot know every single person in the world, everyone will resort to generalisation. But one should try to minimise it and drop it when one actually does know the person. Also, stop worrying so much about people you don’t know, and you will not need to categorise them. I really do not care a jot about the average wage of a man, a woman, and the difference thereof. I care mostly about my wage – to low if you ask me, and maybe those of people I know. That’s about it. While one can draw general average statistics over large populations, I find them meaningless, outside pushing politics.The general destroys the particular, as someone else said once. The average shoe won’t fit many. But this is a topic that can go for many pages, keepin’ it brief!
Now after ample disclaimers and such, let’s get to it, dive in the deep end, as it were.
What the ever-loving fuck is all this sex and gender stuff? And why should we care? (spoiler alert: in a better world, we shouldn’t. Unless we plan on having sex. Which sounds gross.)
We have a bunch of words. Some of them are man and woman, “male” and “female.” Back in the day, words used to mean something. That was their point. An accurate description of these words I got from someone else was “bimodal population pattern based on anisogamy and the traits correlated with it.” Humans, like all other mammals (you and me baby are nothing but .. gah sorry about that), have a reproductive anatomy based on this bimodal pattern, with associated gamete, hormones, chromosomes, a degree physical dimorphism and some degree of behavioural dimorphism. This is good and all, and should be uncontroversial. Ah, should…
Of course there are small numbers of people who do not fit clearly as male or female, this is quite true, but the number is small enough to not be that relevant for the vast majority of cases. Bimodal in not necessarily binary, and there are outliers.
Now the complicated part kicks in. Gender, baby. Gender is more of a linguistic designation, which was used to describe some elements of identity and behavioural bimodality somewhat separated from the physical. This was, throughout a majority of human history and a majority of cultures, strongly correlated with sex. It still mostly is. In Romania, not being so far down the road of social science, most people still see the terms as almost interchangeable, although young urban progressives are working hard to change this.
In the modern mind of the social justice crowd, gender has been completely separated from sex, which makes it much more flexible, not being bound by any biological limit. I would say good luck to em, use it whatever way you want. But keep in mind that being so flexible and undefined, in time there will be little to separate gender from a personality type, a mood, a fashion statement.
This brings me to my main question: What is the goddamn point of even having it? Sex is a clear biological designation. It is needed as human sexuality is strongly linked to it. There can be medical reasons – different treatments, ailments, etc. based. Males will not get ovarian cancer.
But what is the goddamn point of gender? They say gender, as different than sex, is a valid concept, but I just don’t see it, especially unless quite clearly defined and delimited. Unless it is to utterly confuse everything. If it has no biological boundaries, no conceptual boundaries, no nothing, then yes, you can identify with any of the 33,498,227,345,456 genders. But what is the use of it, at this point? If there were 2 or 3 or 7 genders with specific designations, I would see it. But if it is a vast, continuous spectrum, there’s no point to it. Each has his own personality. Leave it at that.
Well, what about gender roles? What about them? Fuck gender roles as well. Do whatever the hell you want, just leave me be while doing it (unless you are an attractive female and what you want to do is me, in that case you can bother me about it).
Sex is a biological descriptive category, which is now turned by progressive in an oppressive prescriptive category. Which leads them to the conclusion blank slaters get about everything: it is a social construct. One example is having gender supersede sex, as far as sexual desire and behaviour. Sexual attraction and behaviour is based on biological sex and anatomical features, whatever those may be. Now I am a bit of a shitlord. I believe in biological difference between men and women. I also believe sucking a penis is gay, even if it identifies as vagina. And I also strongly believe there is nothing wrong with that, if that sort of thing is your bag.
That being said I am the epitome of live and let live. I don’t care. My only problem is that fewer and fewer people seem to take this approach. I let them live, but they won’t let me. This is annoying, especially since besides activist profiting for this, all this drama is not helping anyone.
I have no problem with people switching sex, gender, what-goddamn-ever. Out of politeness, I am willing to treat them with respect. But there are more and more attempts to codify this into law, and with that I have a problem. I would not, were I a business owner, refuse to employ someone because they are transgender. But I do believe it is the right of some other business owner to do so, for whatever reason they may have.
Now, although I have no problem with it, I do think that sex is a biological reality and you cannot truly change it. I think there is a mental problem with someone who thinks they are of a different sex. This is not, of course, any reason to disrespect or bully someone, just like you would not bully someone with autism. I think it is awful issue to have. I cannot imagine how it feels, but it must be very bad to feel like you are in the wrong body. But that cannot change my view that reality is reality.
There are brain morphology issues that may actually justify this belief, beyond a vague notion of mental illness. But I cannot see how mutilating one’s body in a significant and irreversible fashion is not the result of having a serious problem. Although I accept that this process may actually help the person, it may be a drastic treatment, but treatment nonetheless. Chemotherapy can also be debilitating. That being said, I am highly circumspect about it being applied to prepubescent children, who may be confused as much as anything else.
But I do think bodily mutilations can be ehm… problematic in general. Speaking of mutilation, I also think most piercings in general are terribly unattractive. Tattoos I am split on, I have seen some sexy tattoos, but overall most are not. Also, if male, you should not get a tattoo unless you can deadlift twice your bodyweight, at least; nothing worse than tattoos on guys with no muscle. And those people who want to look like lizards and such are crazier than most. But this is all beside the point.
So, in conclusion, you do you, have sex with whomever you want (as long as they want to, as well, obviously) and ignore all this gender crap, would be my advice. Also no piercings.
Now… feel free to school me on what I got wrong in the comments. Give it to me, so to speak.
This article is ridiculous; no alt-text whatsoever!
Well excuse us poor eastern Europeans who cannot afford alt text. Check you privilege you you … oppressor
Where are the bullets!? There are not bullets, I am OUTRAGED!!!
Alt-text for the first picture: Nice tits.
“There’s a song in there somewhere”
C’mon, just link to it.
you want me to enact your labour?
No, we want you to do your job correctly!
Hey, if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. That’s why the guest commenter avatar is a gorilla.
In the modern mind of the social justice crowd, gender has been completely separated from sex,
Except when talking about laws against sex discrimination that make no mention whatsoever of sexual preference or gender. In that case, “sex” means “gender”.
Gender always means sex, as in male/female. Anything else is an artificial construct made up by people with mental disorders. What is NOT an artificial construct is the traditional male/female roles in society. This has been true since the pre-dawn of human history. If these gender denier morons could read and comprehend beyond a pre-school level, they could read some fucking history books written by real scientists.
It means whatever the fuck they need it to mean when they are pursuing some agenda, and don’t you dare question them for being inconsistent you fucking Nazi douchebag!
It’s no wonder they pursue the dumbing down of America through public schools. Because you can’t sell that bullshit to anyone with a few working brain cells.
It’s like the noble savage propaganda. It’s pure bullshit. Just one example, take the humans who have avoided contact with modern society for longer than anyone else, still living as simple hunter gatherers, the mountain tribes of Papua New Guinea. When they were first met by some scientists on an expedition, they were engaged in perpetual warfare against other tribes. They routinely tried to genocide each other and still engaged in cannabalism and other barbaric practices.
Of course, anyone who believes that capitalism needs to be ended in favor of socialism, will believe any fairy tale they’re told.
Gender does not mean sex. Although, they are often used synonymously. Sex is male/female. Gender is masculine/feminine. Gender is an “artificial” construct in that it’s constructed by society. Although I would not say people who think wearing dresses is feminine, or wearing ties is masculine, are suffering form a mental illness. It’s pretty common in our society for people to think pink is for girls and blue is for boys, even though it has no basis in biology. That doesn’t make them insane.
It should be obvious that the traditional male/female roles in society are determined by that society. While they often have a biological basis (eg. men fight in wars because they are physically stronger and more expendable than women), different societies differ in what roles they consider to masculine, feminine, or neither.
Completely tying gender to sex is just as wrong as completely separating gender from sex. That the two are related doesn’t mean they are identical. That two are not identical doesn’t mean they are not related.
“I am an engineer and, stereotypically, I hold most (not all) social science in disdain. I don’t see them as reliable enough to be fit for purpose, and most of it of little use, besides pushing political agendas.”
I am not an engineer, nor a social ‘scientist’. But, I share your belief that the social sciences have run amok. I don’t believe they are worthless, but rather that they can provide alternative perspectives to problems (they are best used as an academic exercise). But they should not be used to answer problems as they do not arrive at their conclusions through logic alone or through observation. All of their conclusions are derived through a counter-factual on existing observations.
When Durkheim (considered to be the father of sociology) was first writing that Catholic countries experience less suicides than protestant countries because of social stigma and the lack of an advanced industrial economy in Catholic countries, he did not believe that this was a conclusive explanation. And, in fact, his theory has been primarily refuted (it appears that Catholic countries had less suicides, because authorities would reclassify these incidences as ‘accidents’ in order to allow for Catholic burials).
Today’s social scientists look at their theories as conclusive and gender studies is just the most extreme example of this mad and nonsensical egotism. They are not satisfied to have their flimsy theories confined to the academies, they must impose their ill-conceived notions on society. The folly of Marx continues
“I am not an engineer, nor a social ‘scientist’. But, I share your belief that the social sciences have run amok. ”
That’s an understatement. Or was that sarcasm?
This shit has become downright tyrannical in nature, as anyone unwilling to accept the pap they peddle for political reasons can have their lives and livelihood destroyed by the champions of this new dogma/religion.
Pretty sure a graduation requirement for ALL social scientists needs to be to demonstrate a clear and unwavering understanding of the phrase “correlation does not equal causation” because a study which merely identifies a correlation at best identifies an interesting point for further study to see if there is a causative link and nothing more.
Loved the Family Guy pictures in this, btw. Hilarious and apropos.
Pie, were you born in Romania? Because your English is fantastic.
That said, I found what you wrote to be pretty typical of the kind of cis-priviliged Nazi bullshit that is keeping society form achieving utopia. Or something.
Actually, I think part of the problem is that we don’t have to spend most of our day not being killed and making sure there is something to eat. Too much free time is dangerous.
Yes, born, raised, still live here. Although it is a shameful family secret that I may be 1/8 Bulgarian
*points finger*
Unclean! Unclean!
Bulgarian? BULGARIAN? How horr… <oh, wait.
Never mind.
Is it true that until the fall of Ceausescu there was no police corruption?
I’ve watched a few episodes of Comrade Detective and I think I can answer…
A curse on you. Romania is rightful Moldovan clay. But in typical gypsy fashion, you stole it. Or so my Moldovan wife says.
The Moldovans will have to fight the Hungarians for it. Good luck.
It doesn’t seem worth the effort.
Probably not, but eastern Europeans aren’t known for their rational decision making abilities, especially when it concerns warring amongst their neighbors.
Won’t comment on the value of Moldavian opinions, but based on the looks of Moldavian women, your wife has a good chance of being hot, so go you.
That sounds positively ethnicist, you, you …. ethnicist!
I definitely married up. I am a very fortunate man. And she’s given me two beautiful daughters, both of whom will be very proficient with handguns by the time they’re old enough to date.
when will this magical time come about? 5 6 years or so?
more like 14+ years. My oldest is just over 2 years old.
But my wife’s sister is newly single. In fact, she just went home to Comrat for a few months. You should drive up and take her on a date.
I had some wine for Comrat once… would try a woman from the region
All you guys around here appropriating cultures..
Chinese proverb: when food is on the table, you have many problems. When no food is on the table, you only have one problem.
“Mo Money Mo Problems”
More concise and modern. I approve.
Where the white womenz at? 🙂
“If I owe you $600, I have a problem. If I owe you $60K, you have a problem.”
If I owe you $60K, you have a problem.
Which begs the question of how I go about solving the problem that is you.
A couple of hard, pipe hitting n*ggas?
Racism!
I learned it from
you dad!Quentin Tarantino!Bring out the gimp!
I like that one, I’m going to use that.
I’ve a lot of Chinese culture is food centric because of starvation being such a big issue there. Like instead of good morning or hello, they ask if you’ve eaten as a greeting.
That’s true in places like Java, where they’ll ask you if you have eaten rice today.
I mean, it couldn’t be more true. If we just go back to being hunter gatherers like some of the greenies are suggesting, they won’t be having any more first world problems. That’s not really possible when you’re subsisting on berries and small mammals.
This. If we all lived in a farm-to-fork world, where all farming was organic, billions would starve to death.
And whenever I think of that point, I wonder if that’s actually what their goal would be anyway. A lot of these people think our world is way too overpopulated and needs culling. And to think, we could cull and get delicious quinoa at the same time!
“This. If we all lived in a farm-to-fork world, where all farming was organic, billions would starve to death.”
There’s obviously some of them who are perfectly fine with that. There’s even some who suggest we need to get the population down to 55 million or some obscure number like that. I’m not sure if it’s dawned on them that this means killing off 7 billion humans. Maybe it does, they’re just sure they won’t be one of those.
New movie addressing this topic:
https://www.foodevolutionmovie.com/screenings/
“Drugs will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no drugs.”
-Furry Freak Brothers
You wait until he puts on his headphones …
I personally don’t have any particular issue with how any legal adult wants to identify. As long as nobody is harmed, who cares what gender they want to think that they are? On the other hand, I think that giving hormone blockers and gender reassignment surgery to minors is child abuse. I also think that in the athletic world, biological men should compete with biological men and biological women should only compete with biological women. Overall, I think that we need to distinguish biological reality with social desires when talking about the transgender question, but as long as a legal adult is making a decision for themselves, I think leaving them alone is the ideal treatment.
Nope, I think men and women should compete together, and may the best man win. Get rid of silly talk like Serena Williams as the greatest tennis player and stuff like that.
I’ve heard some people make the case for that, but I don’t think that’s all that fair to either side. What they can do is that twice a year, men and women can have intersex contests to rub in the point about how men are more athletically capable than women (like how they now have mixed-gender rallies in swimming, for example), and then go back to competing against their own gender.
Intersex?
is that like being try-sexual (will try anything sexual) or quarter-sexual (has sex for a quarter)?
STEVE SMITH RAPENTERSEXUAL – WILL ENTER ANYONE, RAPELY.
Isn’t that how most sports are organized? Anyone can play in the PGA, the segregation is entirely voluntary on the women’s side. They choose to play separately, and are not excluded other than by the neutral rules of the game. With events/sports that there is no significant bimodal distribution there is only one class. Shooting sports, Equestrian events do not normally have such separation.
Now we can get down to working out how xe is going to fit in to a mixed doubles team.
I don’t have any problem with females trying to compete with males — if they can make an MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA team on their merits, that’s fine with me. I don’t see it happening, except as a publicity stunt.
My wife and I were discussing this and I did some research. It turns out that the all-time best track and field records for Iowa high school boys (the state I’m in) are all better than the world records for adult women (Flo-Jo et al.). And you can imagine how many high school boys in other states, plus many college men athletes, would have personal bests that are better than the women’s world record. Elite women can’t compete with elite men when significant athletic prowess is required.
As Dr. Mossy mentioned, sports with much less athleticism (e.g., equestrian events) can and do have women competing with men at the highest levels. NASCAR may lie somewhere in between, although you might think it was closer to equestrianism than, say, football.
OT — The Volokh Conspiracy Opinion
Un-American activities
By Eugene Volokh August 16 at 6:34 PM
I’ve been struck by the similarity between recent calls for suppressing white supremacist speech and past calls for suppressing Communist speech. Of course, there are differences as well — there always are for any analogy — but I thought I’d note some likenesses:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/16/un-american-activities/?utm_term=.6a7db5038ae2
Differences like there was a foreign power actively supporting the Communists, and who were not a marginalized despised element?
Rebel Media explicitly rejects the alt-right in internal memo to the staff.
that was unapologetic. i like it.
Regardless of your views on some of his opinions, Ezra Levant gives zero fucks and will tell you so.
Damn, that was great.
Holy shit, that was awesome.
Too bad he still lost Brian Lilley over it, giving CBC an opportunity to stick the knife in.
And just this morning Andrew Scheer announced he won’t be dealing with Rebel as long as their “editorial direction remains what it is”.
Because obviously site founded by a Zionist Jew is hotbed of Neo Nazis.
Not to mention that Rebel Media has been publishing hit pieces on the Spencerites once and awhile for months.
And they parted ways with Lauren Southern months ago.
I mean, I stopped watching them more than a year ago, because whining was getting at Winston levels, but Nazis? Come the fuck on!
Part of the problem is that the SJW’s are conflating transvestism with transgender. Even if you have breast implants but still have the twig and berries I would consider you a biological male. My .02 cents.
XX, XY, and a few abnormalities. That’s it.
Fuck whomever you want to fuck, just leave me out of it, because I’m not available.
Call yourself whatever you want to call yourself, just don’t expect me to follow suit.
The abnormalities are quite rare. And certainly, near zero of these dumb shit gender activists have that.
More to the point, those abnormalities are genetic defects. Anything that makes you unable to reproduce (and those abnormalities pretty much inevitably do) is a defect.
Which means it cannot be passed on. It’s not like we’re suddenly going to have 3 genders. Although you could probably convince the morons that will happen.
Some medical geneticists question whether the term “syndrome” is appropriate for this condition because its clinical phenotype is normal and the vast majority of XYY males do not know their karyotype.
Not so rare.
XYY syndrome, also known as YY syndrome or Jacobs syndrome, is a genetic condition in which a human male has an extra male (Y) chromosome, giving a total of 47 chromosomes instead of the more usual 46. This produces a 47,XYY karyotype, which occurs every 1 in 1,000 male births.
Klinefelter syndrome (XXY) is one of the most common chromosomal disorders, occurring in 1:500 to 1:1,000 live male births. It is named after Harry Klinefelter who identified the condition in the 1940s.[10] In 1956 identification of the extra X chromosome was first noticed. Mice can also have the XXY syndrome, making them a useful research model.
Ok. I was thinking from what I’ve read that it was a LOT more rare than that. Or maybe I’m just thinking about the condition when someone is born with both sexual organs, which is probably not one of the cases which you are referring to.
By “few” I meant there are a few ways of screwing up XX and XY.
There was a minor hysteria a couple of decades ago when someone discovered that lots of violent criminals (involving multiple murders) tested out as XYY. But it turns out it is quite common. At 1 in 1000 live male births, there would be hundreds of thousands of men in the US with an extra Y chromosome.
As a genetic abnormality, it doesn’t have the same degree of physical manifestation that others do – and the inability to tell an XY from XYY without gene testing means they’re just another Male.
The other disorders cause a bit more problems.
Well, no wonder many of those XYY are violent criminals. Twice the toxic masculinity!
Yes, that was the argument.
You’re thinking of partial or total hermaphrodites, which are very rare. There are also people that have under-developed genitals. Being a hermaphrodite requires both ovarian and testicular tissue; intersex covers any undeveloped, underdeveloped, malformed, or unambiguated genitals, mostly in reference to the external genitals. Intersex and hermaphrodite are congenital defects that are rarely attributable to genetic causes, mostly being caused by terratogens, hormonal issues in the mother, or other environmental factors.
Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking of, and Kinnath was talking about something completely different. My bad on that.
Eh, this shit gets confusing with just the medical issues to consider. Throw all the cultural nonsense on top and it’s almost impossible to keep straight.
Fuck whomever you want to fuck, just leave me out of it, because I’m not available.
Similar to an old Dennis Miller rant, although he followed it with “Except for you bisexuals. Time for you to get off the fence and pick a hole.”
OMG, Matlab plot
I personally don’t give a shit. If you feel like a woman, and want to call yourself a woman, even if you have a cock and balls, go ahead. I’ll even go along with it, at least to be polite.
My issue is more starting 8 year olds on hormone therapy and the whole “You’re a terrible person if you won’t have sex with a woman just because she has a penis!” take [a take that’s actually been thrown more at gay women than at straight men]
Yeah, those articles about how evil and transphobic lesbians are for not wanting dick are hilarious.
what? that is not a thing. no way.
Uhhh…
oh man that is classic. they really turned on her.
Yeah, the extreme nuts screw it up for the “with in normal limits” unique people. Personally, I’m glad there are transvestites and gender queer and whatever in the world. It makes it a more interesting place to live, as long as they are live and let live kind of people.
You make me feel like a natural woman
“My issue is more starting 8 year olds on hormone therapy and the whole “You’re a terrible person if you won’t have sex with a woman just because she has a penis!” take [a take that’s actually been thrown more at gay women than at straight men]”
I agree, both of those things are wrong. So is saying that someone is whatever they identify as. Lauren Southern is not a man, regardless of what it says on her drivers license. Although I’m willing to double-check in the interest of science.
At the same time, Blaire White is not a man, either.
It’s the Hegelian Dialectic/Newton’s Third Law of retarded. People on both sides keep countering the other side by doubling down, until they are both wrong.
I just learned yesterday that Iran is the Sex Reassignment Surgery capital of the world. Being gay can get you killed or whatever, so becoming a chick is acceptable.
It’s not that.
A transgender confronted Khomeni and got him to bless it.
Good stuff, thanks. There was a trigger warning for the references on that page btw, which i eye-rolled
“You’re a terrible person if you won’t have sex with a woman just because she has a penis!”
A man’s got to know his limitations.
+1 La-la-la-la Lola.
It’s not chicks with dicks, it is dudes with tits…
+1 Chucky Schumer
I’m all for the SLD of do what you want with your own money.
I am against laws that make people use specific words. We classify things, that’s what our brains do. If you look like a guy, people will probably say his or him. Strangers, I mean. I would use the words my friends wanted. But I’m not likely to become friends with someone who polices words.
I am very against encouraging children that they are something they are not. Don’t assume a boy playing house or wearing pink means anything. It means he likes playing house. I dressed in costumes for at least a year. Cowboys, super heroes, you know. My first day at catholic school I taught the nuns how to make beer (I had been helping mom and dad for a while). I didn’t become
an alcoholic lumbersexualOH MY GOD.If he later says he is gay, cool. If later he says he really is a woman, cool. let’s not rush to 11 when they are too.
Hey Pie, I really think you could have skipped all the trigger warnings considering your audience (:
Anyway, gender is very simple. You either have a Y chrom or you don’t. I know that gender traditionally means nothing other than male/female. How do I know this? Well, I’ve been creating web forms for organizations since the intertoobz first came into being, and on the HR side and research sides of that, it always consisted of a 2 mutually exclusive check boxes, male or female. Now you have multiple check boxes, male, female, other, I don’t know, I decline to answer, and fuck you sexist racist bigots!. But that does not change biological reality. You either have a Y chrom or you have 2 X chroms, end of fucking story.
But what this is all about, leftists know that men who will not identify as men, men who are in touch with their feminine side and who accept the notion of ‘toxic masculinity’, are easy to control. And we need compliant humans to usher in the great commie utopia, which has so far been denied us by pesky toxic aggressive who will kill you dead if you try to force bullshit communism on them.
First off all on that issue, there is nothing ‘toxic’ about masculinity. It has had a purpose throughout human history. The high levels of aggression in male humans has served as defense against other tribes and clans who wanted your territory and your females.
So you say, well we’re not tribes and clans any longer competing for territory, we are post modern progressives who no longer need these traits. So we can just cast off our toxic masculinity and become a bunch of asexual wusses in pink tutus running around pulling down inanimate objects representing some sort of perceived hate. First off, this is a very dangerous idea because there is still a lot of danger in the world that needs protecting against. And from a personal standpoint, I’m quite comfortable with my own toxic masculinity and I’m going to keep it, thank you. If you want it, commies, come and fucking take it.
I use the disclaimers cause I find them amusing and because deep down in my heart I hope against hope that one day I may be almost as good a writer as Robby S from Ye Olde SIte. SO I practice and practice being non offensive. milquetoast if you will.
You should write to Mitt Romney and ask him to be your sensei.
I knew you were doing that, just had to mess with you a little.
Oh, but if you want to be equal to Robby and crew, you have to use ‘to be sure’ and ‘Trump is worse than Hitler’ a lot more. Only then can you get the cocktail party invites.
Sitting in the airport and of course cnn is on. The barcelona attack had just been reported, a few minutes coverage, and then? They went to some chick to talk about Trump tweeting this morning. Like jfc, they even literally say the tweet is a distraction [from his sooper nazi supporters or something) while they cover this nothingness. They’ve gone back to Barcelona coverage finally, but how fucking pathetic.
Do you also complain about the batboy coverage in the weekly world news?
I think some of the /pol/ guys were planning on getting a bunch of universal remotes to change the channels away from CNN everywhere hey went.
I like that idea.
does it violate the NAP?
Nope, CNN is violence against my common sense.
It’s not your property, so I think yes.
More nazis from VA? I knew it! Or wait, maybe the Amish again?
Catalan separatists!
Watching cnn at a mcdonalds…barcelona coverage is still on. Sounds off though.
Yeah they’ve gone to full time barcelona now. To be fair it was pretty early when they didn’t have any experts around to give their pennies.
Though it’s also irking me that they cut off Tillersons press conference to repeat the Barcelona stuff. Cnn sucks so much.
I guess the white supremacist movement has infected the Spaniards.
It’s worse, the Nazis have gotten to the Amish and assimilated them. I’m afraid the new Amish/Nazi alliance cannot be defeated.
white supremacist
Um…I think they’ve had that for a while.
That’s silly, the Spanish aren’t white. Too much Moorish blood.
Yet somehow, some of them made it all the way to the new world with light hair and skin and blue eyes.
I have a good friend from Barcelona, a full-blooded and full-throated Catalan who has blonde hair and blue eyes.
Well, that’s an issue I’d been pondering – whether the recent ‘closer ties’ between the Catalan and Basque Separatists might not be a factor here. I haven’t been following the news in any detail regarding whether the perp was Amish or not, but politics is poppin’ in Catalonia at the present.
Sicilians dude, Sicilians.
Sicilians appear to be some sort of related hominids prone to hirsuiteness in excess of what is normal for H. Sapiens. Either that or an unhealthy mutation.
Homo Neanderthalensis lives! Wait, we’re not sure they were that hairy… Habilis? Could it be? Or maybe… STEVE SMITH RAPED ALL SICILIAN ANCESTORS, NOW RAPE EVERYONE, RAPE YOU TOO, YOU HAVE HAIRY OFFSPRING AND STEVE SMITH RAPE ALSO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZUJKXs6W-4
You expect me to follow a youtube link from Glibs, let alone at work?
Uh, yes. An SJW might curl up and die, but it’s not unsafe for work.
one of my favorite /pol/ memes
When you point out the fact that something is a joke, you take the fun out of it.
We go live now to Reason HQ
Gillespie: “Which article should I go with ‘It’s time to take down the Franco statues’ or ‘Nazis- everywhere- under your bed!’?”
Ward: “We’re going to look like complete hacks after pimping up the danger of 200 wannabe Nazis over the past six days to now say that the threat of Islamic terrorism is overblown”
ENB: “Can I write a story about how Spanish authorities are too puritan with regards to dildos to deflect from this story?”
Welch: “Not now, Liz”
ENB: “Yes, now, how am I going to get hired by the Washington Post if I don’t deflect?”
Shikha: “Honest condemnation of Islamic terrorism must first recognize that the EU has been baiting them or something”
Welch: “I think I’m going to see if the Libertarian Republic has a job opening”
Welch will return back to his folksinging career.
*behind the scenes with Postrel in complete control*
“WRITE MORE ABOUT TRUMP YOU GIMP BOYS! OR I’LL PUT YOU BACK IN THE DUNGEON! I TOLD YOU, IT’S TRUMP 24X7 NOW GET BACK TO WORK!”
Barcelonans are just like Adam Lanza
Top kek
So you’re saying creating a culture of oppression can be turned against the oppressors? Let me find my shocked face.
Whom did the cake-shop owners oppress?
I was thinking of public schools starting out to suppress Catholics and now being used to bash traditionalist, but if you want to make everything about cake…I fully support the right to refuse service.
I’m simply suggesting that under the prior, “homophobic” regime, businesses could decide for themselves whether to cater gay “weddings.” Under the current regime, private businesses have no such right.
Under the prior regime, cops took protection money from brothels, strip clubs, and gay clubs and raided those who hadn’t paid up – or those who had paid off the wrong people. Under the current regime, the brothels and strip clubs get similar treatment (though based on moral zeal of course, not bribes, which doesn’t happen anymore) – I don’t know if gay clubs get harassed under some other pretext nowadays.
As gay-liberation hit key cities, the authorities hesitated to close gay bathhouses, though reports were filtering in that people who went to these bathhouses for random encounters sometimes developed what was then a fatal disease. I’m trying to think of a way to blame the conservatives for the dreadful, painful deaths of so many people who engaged in activities which turned out to be unhealthy (who could have predicted)? But apparently the problem wasn’t caused by lax health authorities, but by Ronnie Ray-gun (a former actor from Hollywood with gay associates) didn’t say enough of the right words.
I would think that if large numbers of people were dying from diseases associated with, say, drugs or overeating, then the last people you’d think of as “allies” would be the Fat Friendly Association and the local drug dealer, but what do I know?
I’m trying to think of a way to blame the conservatives for the dreadful, painful deaths of so many people who engaged in activities which turned out to be unhealthy
Maybe anti-sodomy laws forced people underground and kept them from sharing information openly leading to more deaths?
In San Francisco’s bathhouses?
“…for every gay activist arguing that the closure [of the bathhouses] was essential to save the lives of gay men there was at least one other arguing that it was counter-productive, both in terms of halting the spread of the disease and in terms of protecting gay rights….
“…Bill Kraus, president of the Harvey Milk Gay Democratic Club, argued that “it would be increasingly difficult to tell straight politicians that there is a terrible crisis if we don’t act like there is a crisis ourselves.” * According to Randy Shilts, in his book And The Band Played On, Kraus’ advocacy of bathhouse closures earned him the title of “sexual Nazi”…”
“But with 24 hours of [health director Mervyn Silverman’s] announcement of the [bathhouse] closure order on October 9th, 1984, the greater majority of bathhouses were open for business again. They certainly didn’t believe Silverman had the power to close them. Nor did they believe that closure was an appropriate response.
“When Silverman had stated, “Make no mistake about it; these fourteen businesses are not fostering gay liberation. They are fostering disease and death”, the president of the Golden Gate Business Association had responded, “Rather than fostering health, Silverman’s remarks were fostering bigotry and hate.”…
“As for the real question – did the fight to close and/or control the bathhouses have any real impact on the spread of HIV – I’d [author Colin Clews] personally be inclined to think not. Changing people’s behaviour – sexual or otherwise – is a complex issue [etc.]” – which apparently means they’d have been engaging in the same unhealthy behavior in some other places than the bathhouses, which has the benefit of being hard to disprove.
I don’t see how an unanticipated disease absolves moral scolds of forcing a culture underground so information isn’t as readily available? People didn’t talk about HIV because of the stigma of being gay and the straight community didn’t give a shit until HIV went mainstream. Personally, I don’t care if you consider homosexuality immoral. That’s your right. But prohibition always makes things worse. Violence against prostitutes. Poisoned alcohol. Fentanyl spike heroin. All the consequences of people controlling other people’s behavior and using the ill effects of the black market to reinforce their own moral superiority, by saying “if people did what I told them to do, they would be fine.” I.e. If you don’t want AIDS, don’t be gay.
“forcing a culture underground”
In San Francisco in the 1980s? What alternate-universe scenario is this?
“prohibition always makes things worse”
Prohibition of what? Spreading deadly infections? I that that would be a NAP violation.
Are you being obtuse on purpose or do you really believe it was easy to be openly gay in all but the smallest enclaves In 1970’s America. The greater point is, cultural conservatives had 80 years of oppressing gays, minorities and other deplorables. Now the tide is turning and culture war isn’t so fun anymore. Ignore current religious strongholds that ban alcohol, prostitution, drugs, stripe clubs, whatever if you want, but don’t come crying about the counter culture pushing back.
“do you really believe it was easy to be openly gay in all but the smallest enclaves In 1970’s America”
Yeah, I’m calling straw-man on that one. I gave examples from San Francisco. Are you saying health problems were worse for gay people in the Deplorable Belt? If not, maybe it wasn’t “repression” which spread the disease.
“the counter culture pushing back”
Pushing back against whom? Innocent bakers and florists? Or are you linking them via guilt by association to the alleged social conservative reign of terror in the past?
Uh cops used to kick the shit out of gays. A lot. They used to raid gay bars under the justification of mafia ties and then ‘accidentally’ kick the teeth in of their non-criminal patrons.
So you’re saying that “Under the prior regime, cops took protection money from brothels, strip clubs, and gay clubs and raided those who hadn’t paid up – or those who had paid off the wrong people”?
Again, are you saying these bakers and florists were cops earlier in their careers, and kicked gay people’s teeth in?
There is a reason there were gay communities. The answer, they weren’t welcome in religious America. It it’s side stepping the current religious based ban of “vice”. The fact that there is a vice squad says moral police aren’t dead.
Or in other words, “Under the current regime, the brothels and strip clubs get similar treatment (though based on moral zeal of course, not bribes, which doesn’t happen anymore [nb – that was sarcastic]) – I don’t know if gay clubs get harassed under some other pretext nowadays.”
I’m saying that Florida Man’s statement is correct, that a culture was being forced underground by agents of the state.
And you’re being a disingenuous ass by trying to create an alternative justification for their actions. In 1962 cops were not beating the shit out of people coming out of gay bars because they didn’t pay protection money. They kicked the shit out of them because they were faggots.
Of course they took protection money, you ignoramus, for instance at the Stonewall Inn – “Once a week a police officer would collect envelopes of cash as a payoff.”
“trying to create an alternative justification for their actions”
WTF are you even talking about? Why do you think they were able to extort protection money, you clueless dolt? Because of the laws aimed at brothels, gay bars, etc.
And what, pray tell, do you suppose gay people thought they were buying with their protection money? Exemption from raids and beatings, that’s what, you cretin.
Wow Eddie, it’s almost like Stonewall is one incident in a much larger history of the police going after homosexuals. Almost like they had a specific characteristic that lead to them being targeted. But keep screaming ignoramus at me while constructing your revisionist horseshit.
Dear Lord, stop running around in circles, you’ll get dizzy.
One more time: Why were the cops able to extort protection money – and didn’t always honor the “protection”? Because there were laws against the targeted establishments, so of course those establishments’ clients had characteristics – being gay – just like brothels’ employees and clients had characteristics – being hookers and johns.
At this point I suppose it’s a bit late for you to admit that you missed my point, since you have grown so invested in beating on a straw man.
Scum scrapes you off the bottom of its show. I won’t let you distort what I said.
Yes agents of the state were targeting gay men in many parts of the this country. At the same time, it is disingenuous to blame this persecution on the religious. There has been a general societal dislike for homosexuality since before Christianity. The Romans, themselves, looked down on homosexual behavior and would tar their political opponents by accusing them of being gay (this was obviously different from Greek culture, but Western Civilization was shaped more by Roman culture than Greek).
Both of these facts are true
And you keep ignoring and pretending that my point doesn’t exist which is that no, police did not just solely target homosexuals for extortion, they also targeted them because they were a hated minority that they could abuse. Handwaving homophobic cops as ‘just wanting protection money’ is completely dishonest and revisionist horseshit.
Did you walk out of the operating room in the middle of brain surgery, before the doctors put your brain back in?
You think I’m saying cops demanded protection money from people they liked? From popular and powerful people? You’re retarded.
No, not in San Francisco. In places all over the country. And they were all predicated on legislating morality and forcing gays into the shadows or into jail cells.
I had an argument with Jesse in a different venue and I was talking about how the left are almost exclusively the puritans of today. He was quick to disagree and explain to me the systematic oppression of the gay community at the hands of socons that had been going on until very recently (and in some cases was still used by the state to oppress). I did my research and he was right. There still is a lot of institutional bigotry based on social conservatism that is aimed at sexuality. It’s a stain on our country and the sooner the right eliminates it, the sooner they will have the moral high ground in the fight against progressives who want to subjugate those who engage in wrongthink.
I am pretty conservative, but feel like I’m pretty tolerant of things I don’t personally agree with but don’t give a shit if people do in their own home, or in the public square as long as it doesn’t aggress against someone else. Too many conservatives still want to lord over the sexuality of others. That’s a battle they deserve to lose.
Quote: “forcing a culture underground”
In San Francisco in the 1980s? What alternate-universe scenario is this?
This is you feigning ignorance in order to handwave legitimate oppression that homosexuals experienced. Is this, or is this not, a disingenuous revisionist lie that is not at all accurate to the historical record?
Don’t whine about people distorting what you said when you say garbage like this.
Sloopy, way up above I specifically described how the government used to mistreat gay people *because they were gay.* Please read my actual words, not the words some random weirdo puts in my mouth.
You think I’m saying cops demanded protection money from people they liked? From popular and powerful people? You’re retarded.
*Whines about people distorting what he said, distorts what other people say*
You lie.
I was responding specifically to this:
“Maybe anti-sodomy laws forced people underground and kept them from sharing information openly leading to more deaths?”
I gave counterevidence indicating that public approval of sodomy didn’t reduce deaths, and may have done the contrary.
You are a liar who lies.
And you told a homophobic lie when you talked about the LAPD beating a gay man to death for no reason, when it’s apparent from the context that the LAPD was beating a gay man to death *for being gay.*
You are not only a liar who lies, but a homophobic liar, by your own standards.
The opinions of disingenuous cunts of whether I’m a liar mean very little to me.
And the fact remains you told several lies, one of which was a homophobic lie by your own standards.
Boy, boys, no fighting! Time out!
I’m not taking any sides here, just gong to leave a comment about being gay in the 60s and 70s.
I can’t really comment on the 60s, since I was a little kid and I didn’t even know what gay was. In fact, I never heard the term until I was in high school, and the term gay was not what wasa used. On my first day of high school on the bus, some kids told me ‘There’s a fag in the high school!’. I was sort of embarrassed because I had no idea what that even meant, and it’s highly embarrassing to admit to other high school boys that you don’t know what some adult thing is all about, so I just played along and laughed, still not knowing what the fuck they were even talking about.
Playing forward about 5 years after I was out of high school with nothing but mostly free time on my hands. I had a friend who was older. He always would buy us beer. I sort of knew the guy was gay, but no one ever talked about it. Then one day, he told one of my other friends that he was gay and the guy freaked completely the fuck out, and never talked to the guy after that. In general the reactions from my other friends ranged from ridicule to hatred, to the few of us who were just indifferent and said ‘Hey man, that’s your personal business, no problem’. I was still friends with the guy for several years after that, until I moved away from there. But I have to say I watched the guy sink into depression because most people would never accept him for who he was. It was really very sad because he was a good guy.
So from my personal experience, that’s what being gay was like in the 60s and 70s. It was not easy at all and coming out may even have put you in danger of physical harm, and at least a lot of hate and ridicule.
I’m not trying to jump into your guys argument, Eddie. I was specifically addressing a comment pretty early on in it and the threading, plus amount of time it took to write, may have made it look like I was piling on.
I was specifically addressing the San Francisco thing. Persecution of gays, mostly
men, was a nationwide issue. And the states and cities that trended socially conservative have lagged way behind those who trend liberal when it comes to treating gays as equal. And I mean in the eyes of the law.
I’m sorry to hear that, and of course this illustrates the *reason* why the government’s anti-gay activities (some of which I described) were tolerated by the public. (And just to be a pedant, the government’s policy was the initial subject of the discussion).
I’ve also shown that some gay-rights people in SF endorsed highly dangerous policies which may have contributed to the deaths of gay Americans, but since they meant well and used the right words, they get a pass.
Now, on the WWJD front, we know that Christ sat and dined with tax collectors – that’s not because he thought tax-collecting was cool, but because He was, in modern terminology, doing outreach. But more than that, He actually loved people and was prepared to go through a good deal of agony to prove it.
The Al Sharptons and John Titors of the world want to commit injustices in the present because of injustices in the past – and both Sharpton and Titor want to accuse anyone who protests against current injustices of supporting past injustices. It’s pure demagoguery.
Everyone, please pay attention to the fact that Eddie just equated the injustice of gay men being killed, forced to live lives of shame and danger, being jailed, and paying protection money to the police for the right of free association in a private business to being sued for not making a wedding cake for a gay marriage.
And the cake thing is nothing anyone here supports.
Sloopy, again, I was dealing with an assertion that more acceptance of gay behavior leads to better health outcomes. I gave counter-evidence, and I thought I was savvy enough to acknowledge past persecution of gay people (at least in large cities) in order to avoid the “gay basher!” slur, but that doesn’t seem to work with everyone.
The persecution I cited – and remember, I brought it up – involved persecution of gay clubs and their patrons by crooked cops – apparently I need to add Trump-style disclaimers that (a) gay-bashing is wrong even by honest cops (b) I denounce the ordinances and laws which allowed cops to persecute gays, prostitutes, etc., (c) laws which allow the persecution of gays should be presumed to be motivated by anti-gay animus, (d) gay-bashing is wrong in both small towns and in large cities, (d) mistreating gays in the private sector is wrong as well as in the public sector, etc.
Now, as the the definition of “equality” – I agree that gay Americans – like all Americans – have the right of equality in this: That all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with inalienable rights, also that these rights have specific expressions in the Anglo-American tradition. So among the natural rights which Americans get to enjoy on an equal basis is the right not to be beaten by police, not to be murdered, not to be subject to arbitrary law enforcement, to have the government treat you as a person not as a target for harassment, extortion or death, etc., etc.
And to protect these basic rights there needs to be a penumbra of legal immunity to protect against the reality of abusive law enforcement – thus certain vices, whether or not there is a natural right to engage in such vices (a fascinating conversation, but I’ll skip it) should be legal because vice cops’ behavior tends to be worse than the vices they repress, etc.
And as a further penumbra, I would add as a side note that we might be skeptical of immigrants who are disposed to deny these rights, and prefer instead to behead or bury alive people who like certain types of sexual behavior.
Now, if it turns out that one of the bakers or florists being persecuted today used to physically beat gays while serving as a cop in the 60s or 70s, or what have you, I would admit that their persecution today is poetic justice (but not actual justice).
“Everyone, please pay attention to the fact that Eddie just equated the injustice of gay men being killed, forced to live lives of shame and danger, being jailed, and paying protection money to the police for the right of free association in a private business to being sued for not making a wedding cake for a gay marriage.”
Et tu, SugarFree?
Don’t get your tentacles in a twist, I didn’t say murder was morally equivalent to forced association.
Duh.
Eddie seems to think the gays deserved to get the shit beat out of them by the cops and deserved to get STDs because they didn’t have Catlick-approved sex.
Um, let’s just assume Ted is trying to be funny.
LAPD beats a gay man to death for no reason.
“LOL they must have wanted protection money.” -Eddie
Fuck you scum.
You said the LAPD beat a gay man to death for no reason?
You homophobe, you’re saying there isn’t such a thing as anti-day bias! Go hang out with Rick Santorum, you hater!
“I’m not saying anti-gay bias doesn’t exist, I’m just constantly trying to handwave and ignore historical oppression or justify it in the context of not being bigotry.” -Eddie.
That’s not even wrong, it’s just words taped together at random from the Leftist Invective Generator.
What you said was *exactly* what you imputed to me – you said the LAPD “beats a gay man to death for no reason.”
Not “because he’s gay” – which I would have assumed would be why a murderous cop would kill a gay man – but for “no reason.” Sounds like you’re trying to hand-wave around anti-gay bigotry.
No homo, can you guys just kiss and make-up now?
Comparing John Titor to Al Sharpton is a low blow and uncalled-for.
Let’s all take a deep breath and cool off. We’re among friends. Even if we don’t agree about everything, we can not stoop to associating each other to assholes like Sharpton.
*grudgingly puts gloves back on and skates away*
And after I said this place was mostly civil. For shame.
You’re worse than Rachel Maddow, Tundra
Maybe, but I’m also way prettier.
Well played
I wonder when the demands will start for all these Rhodes Scholars to renounce their resumes because of … whatever we feel like accusing Rhodes of …
It’s gonna be hard on the establishment and media left ….
All right, all right, Al Sharpton is worse, sorry. 🙁
That includes google/twitter/whatever kicking conservatives off their service.
The gender sjw shit seems like it’s tailor made to provide victim cred…to separate the right thinking people from those nasty nasty white folk as an escape valve. A cynical, self serving social innovation is what I’m saying.
Nothing but mammals…
insufficiently nerdy
Did the Truck of Peace strike again?
It’s the same shit as all the rest of the social justice cadre’s bag of shit. They aren’t out to do whatever they want. They’re out to force you to comply. Preferably, in as humiliating a way as possible. Someone posted a quote that I found incredibly meaningful for this situation, as well as the ongoing statue wars:
– Theodore Darlymple
Their primary concern is less about their own fulfillment in living as someone of the opposite sex than it Is in forcing you to recognize them as of the opposite gender.
Have you noticed that lately, they’ve been really doubling down on one of their other tactics, which is to state myth as reality. It will go something like ‘99% of the American public support progressives policies. We just aren’t getting their votes yet because we haven’t explained to them well enough how we want exactly what they do!’.
Part of me thinks that they are doubling down on that because they have so little actual power compared to what they once had. They are screaming about boys using the girls’ shower and tearing down statues they didn’t even know existed a week ago because that is all they can do.
I know we’ve discussed this many times before on TOS, John, especially with the breakout of the identity politics and the college campus insanity. But I have to once again make a dire prediction for the Democrats. This embracing of antifa is going to be a huge thorn in their side and like moving further left and identity politics, they are stuck with it, there’s no turning back. The loons are now in command. They just step in one pile of shit after another.
As a risk manager, I’m not sure I like that. The Democrats lining up with the ultra hard left, to me, represents an altered distribution of potential outcomes. What it means is that the downside tail of the distribution has grown fatter. The probability of a “bad” outcome (say, Democratic rule) has gone down. At the same time the probability of a catastrophic outcome (hard left rule) has increased.
Every once in a while they will arrest some Occupy Wall Street Antifa type for a no kidding blow something up terrorist plot. Antia is also totally in bed with the radical Muslims. One of these days one of those retards is going to get lucky and do something horrible. When that happens, what are the Democrats going to do? They have associated themselves with them.
How did the van get from Charlottesville to Barcelona so quickly?
C-130 jetliner.
+1 propeller plane
Containerized shipping from the slave wharves of E. Market Street
Port of Charlottesville… not even 30 hours old, and I already love this meme.
Jew magik
Secret Nazi powers.
Nazi secret alien ufo technology confirmed
How did the van get from Charlottesville to Barcelona so quickly?
It’s an amphibious assault van. KOCH INDUSTRIES, FTW!
The EM-50?
Making gender completely independent of biology is to allow people to not deny objective reality but force everyone else to do so and buy into their view. If your gender has nothing to do with your actual body, then it is whatever your mind says it is without any connection to objective reality. Since you determine it and not any objective reality, everyone else is now obligated to recognize your subjective reality at the expense of objective reality. Everyone gets to play pretend and we are all obligated to go along with each other’s pretend.
Says the dog in a suit.
I identify as a stylish Sha Inu. You got a problem with that, bigot!!
You don’t have the shoulders for that getup.
Hater
Why yes, I am fuelled by hate, thank you for noticing.
It is a far more economical and renewable source of energy than wind and solar.
And it is a lot easier to obtain than the tears of your enemies, which is great fuel but sadly not renewable.
The Trump Energy Plan seems to be trying to make them renewable though.
Why yes, I am fuelled by hate, thank you for noticing.
I’ve gone dual fuel: Hate, and Rage. The rage gives great torque, but you really get more mileage from the hate.
Furries. SMH
Shah Inu, Dog Emperor of Nude.
A stylish Shiba Inu. You big hater!!
I can identify as being a space prince from planet Zorg or whatever the fuck else imaginary planet. So by their own admission, they must accept that as fact. I can also say that I, as space prince of Zorg, reserve the right to punch them in the face if they start their bullshit because that’s how it works on Zorg.
So the question still remains: are traps gay?
Yes, in all iterations.
Iowahawk passed on the announcement that all blanket blaming of groups for car attacks is suspended immediately and until further notice.
As long as I am not forced to pay for it.
We’re all in this together, Drake, you sexist bigot monster.
Well that ship has sailed. And it’s not gay if it’s not in sight of land
Here is what terrifies me about the whole transgender thing. I have liberal friends I have known well for 20 years or more. I know for a fact they would never have bought into transgender identity much less transgender rights as recently as four or five years ago. If ten years ago I had told them that in 2017 they would be advocating for boys who identified as girls to be able to use the girls’ showers in middle schools, they would have called me a paranoid nut. Yet, that is exactly what many of them are saying today.
What scares me about that is not transgenderism, which I think is a passing fad. The scary part is how quickly they changed and how there seems to be no limit to what they will believe so long as believing it is deemed necessary to be tolerant. I never fully understood how people believed in the nonsense behind the Holocaust or the Great Terror. Now I do. What are they going to have to believe next in order to remain “tolerant”? God only knows.
This is very well said
Just remember, the end goal is destroying western civilization, the traditional family, and replacing capitalism with communism. All of this stuff is just the indoctrination and warm up. People have to believe anything no matter how crazy before you can convince them that communism is the answer.
Why do people dislike warmth in their homes in winter so much? And food? And not queuing for 10 hours? I don’t get it. Hot in summer and cold in winter is no way to go through life.
It’s free?
I dislike the whole postmodern no objective truth crap. I mean i believe trying to find the truth is the thing to do., You may not find it, but at least look.
To clarify, you lot may not find it. I did.
It is one thing to say you can never obtain the full truth, you can’t. Saying that it doesn’t exist is just embracing complete chaos and nihilism. They are nihilists man. Nihilists!
Say what you want about the Charlottesville Nazis, but at least they have an ethos.
“#BREAKING Van ploughs into crowd in Barcelona, several hurt: police”
The van just up and ploughed into people by all by itself!
Must have been an English van, because of the way it ploughed
“pluffed”?
pl-augg-ed
plaft-ed
I’m sure that CNN is all over it in calling out the hate group behind it.
It’s those reckless automobile manufactuerers, putting dangerous equipment into civilian hands! Spain needs common-sense horsepower control!
It’s worse, it’s a copy cat of the VA Nazis.
Well, the Nazis and the Islamists were allies…
Spain already levies a tax calculated by the horsepower of a vehicle; they just need to tax harder.
CNN indulging in some sincere chin-pulling, wondering if it’s copycat of Charlottesville. Heh.
These people are beyond parody.
Is Barcelona a copy cat of Charlottesville?
LOLOLOLOL, when you’ve lost all credibility…
…derp harder?
Jesus, these people make it so hard to parody them…
OT – I’m not gonna sugarcoat it, someone was being a wee bit unkind to Comrade Sarwark on the Derpbook.
Nick: Oh… that was… who is this guy?
Matt: Some nobody, definitely not a respected journalist, like us.
Nick: Yeah, that’s for sure, probably one of those yokel commenters who left because they’re racist.
Robby: Hey, but maybe that scored us a few likes with the millennials on facebook?
Matt: No, they still hate our guts.
Nick: Well, keep trying, we need more cocktail party invites!
OK, which of you assholes was this? Sloopy? Mike?
Not me. I would never have said “the open mouths of ENB and Weigel”, because I think they’re the same person.
Sarward keeps attacking libertarians on twitter as well. He went after julie last i saw.
Fucking Julie, that no good right winger.
Julie Borowski?
Okay, dickhead, now we throw down. Nobody messes with Token Libertarian Girl!
I just wish she could have a voice transplant. *sad face*
I don’t mind her voice. Sometimes the fact that the cleft on her chin is diagonal is distracting to me, though.
She’s partially deaf. Have some mercy
I didn’t know that; it explains much.
On the up-side, I’m in no position to force her to change her voice, any more than I’d like her to be in a position to force me to change my pompous, entitled voice.
So there us that.
Julie Brorwski is a doll. That dickhead better leave Julie alone. Everyone loves a pretty girl. What the hell is wrong what that loser?
He thinks he’s helping the LP?
I guess.
Everyone loves a pretty girl.
Err, no. You know who doesn’t? The other girls.
Everyone who matters of course…..
But this is a guy.
Who cares, they aren’t pretty girls.
Not necessarily
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGHAfBVP3gw
The line must be drawn here, no further!
You can shit all over Tom Woods and I’ll probably just grumble about it, but when you go after Julie Borowski we must say ‘here and no farther’.
She doesn’t even insult anyone. She tries to play nice with the cosmos and the libertarians (that’s right, I don’t consider cosmos to be libertarian)
Who is Sarward?
He’s the Chairman of the Libertarian Party. Imagine Gary Johnson. Without the charm, decency or charisma.
A Top Man, then?
You’re painting an ugly picture there.
Well, to be fair, his response to the election was pretty good.
“Your tears are delicious and your parties will fail.”
Yes that i enjoyed
This? Not so much
Did i spell it wrong? Idk.
He chairs the national LP
When did he go after Julie? That is beyond the pale
I know it’s not him by the absence of hilarious* nicknames, but that tweet has something of a Mike M. flavor to it. (Not that I don’t agree)
Ah, Purging Intensifies ….
I like…
Pretty sure that’s someone like Tony or Buttplug parodying some extreme-version of the bitchy commentariat.
but it can’t be one of the 2 of them, because its too clever for either
At the end of lunch so can’t post very much. Just want to say very good article. These people can ignore reality as much as they want, but eventually the consequences of reality will hit them. But, they better not expect me to play along with their make-believe or pay for their make-believe. That is all.
Get back to work!
I’ll make it real simple: basing laws on personal moral judgments : drugs bad, strippers bad, gays bad, leaves you without a leg to stand on when morals change/power shifts: anti-gay bad. Fighting the culture war in the legislature is wrong no matter which side does it.
All laws are based on moral judgements.
Fuck gender roles as well. Do whatever the hell you want, just leave me be while doing it
*roaring applause*
That’s something that has bothered me about non-binary people. The vast majority of the ones I know are women, and they reject their gender because “I don’t fit with traditional femininity.” What?? As I mentioned in my rant about Feminism Is Over a few weeks ago, we are living in a time when women are allowed to dress any way they want, act any way they want, do anything they want, and no one cares. But these people want to drag us back to this imaginary version of the 1950s that exists in their minds, and then because they don’t fit that imagined ideal of femininity, reject their gender altogether. Most of these people also claim to be feminists. This is one of my pet peeves.
That is one of the things that bugs me the most about transgenderism. it enforces a pretty strict view of the genders. Just because you more masculine than most other women doesn’t mean you are not really a woman. Women can be masculine too. But transgenderism says they can’t. That they are really a man. And that is bullshit.
“You see, boys wear blue and they have short hair and they play outside and play army. Girls wear pink and have long hair and play dress-up and have dolls. I wouldn’t expect you narrow-minded right wingers to understand.”
I don’t know anyone who says that.
They don’t say it but that is the implication of the beliefs.
I don’t don’t who this “they” supposedly are, or what beliefs you are referring, but I’ve never heard a transgendered person imply anything like that. In fact, I can’t think of one who has addressed the subject, without clearly stating the opposite.
Isn’t it entirely predicated on that strict view? Why chop off your junk if it’s okay for men to wear dresses and act feminine? If we were just talking about cross dressing, I would agree with you, but we’re talking about people “feeling like they’re in the wrong body”, mutilating their body, and taking on stereotypical gender roles of the opposite gender.
Well said. The transgender people seem to go straight from “I wanna act like the stereotype of the other gender” to “my body is the wrong sex”. IOW, the “social construct” should dictate biological reality.
Its kinda confused, but I guess that goes with the territory.
They all don’t chop off their junk. And not all of them take on “stereotypical gender roles of the opposite gender”, or even the sexual preference most common with their gender.
Regardless, I don’t know of any transgendered people who don’t think it’s OK for men to wear dresses and act feminine. While no group completely agrees on anything, that gender is a spectrum certainly seems to be their majority opinion.
If it is not the case that failing to meet some standard of masculinity or feminity of your biological sex means you are the opposite sex, then how does one know that they are transgendered? They couldn’t. To know that you are the opposite gender of your sex necessarily means there is some standard of masculinity or feminity associated with being each gender. Otherwise, you couldn’t tell what gender you were to know that it wasn’t what your biological sex is.
They don’t say that. That is true. But that is because they are morons and lunatic who haven’t thought about the necessary implications of what they are saying.
No one is saying masculinity and femininity don’t exist. You wrote that transgenderism says that woman can’t be masculine without being men. You could add a lion and a tin man to that argument and turn it into a musical.
It’s the basis of the tumblr/”transtrender”/”tucute” position.
If you disagree with it, you’re “truscum.”
I generally don’t know any actual trans people who say it. It’s the NBs. I do, however, know a few trans people who de-transitioned and became NB—literally because they weren’t getting attention anymore. (Because they “passed” very well, so people just started treating them like straight people instead of special queer snowflakes.)
This is the part that gets me. In the 50s my mom’s mom was running a business with her husband, my dad’s mom was running a farm, being a school teacher and head of the house hold while her husband was an over the road trucker. Sure there were women who were just normal housewives, my mom’s mom was appearently one of the few women in the small town with a drivers licence, but there were also women who chose to do other things.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/898254409511129088
No… fucking… way. The media is going to lose their shit over this one. Absolute Madman.
Another couple tweets like that and his popularity will fall to about -48100%!
I’m not sure what the media will do when his popularity eventually falls to zero. You can’t really have negative numbers for that.
Does it talk about that in Pershing’s Wikipedia entry? If not, I seriously doubt anyone in the media will understand the reference.
It’s OK though, ‘cos he was black, wasn’t he?
I love how with his tweets the first response is the account posting the countdown clock to the end of Trump’s term. I think it’s an inside job for keks
Uh, guys, the historical record pretty heavily indicates that Pershing did not bury Muslims in pig skins. It’s a legend that popped up like forty years after the fact. We have no documentation or evidence that it ever occurred.
the historical record pretty heavily indicates that Pershing did not bury Muslims in pig skins
The linked tweet makes no mention of pigs, pig skins, pork, or pig based products of any kind. Is there another tweet from The Big D that does?
Give me a break. That’s the only thing non-military historians/history buffs remember about him. I don’t think he’s saying “let the terrorists be allowed to turn in their guns and leave consequence free’ which is shit Pershing actually did.
It’s pretty well implied with the “Look at what General Pershing did”. Unless it’s another 16D chess thing, it’s what he was referring to.
I’m just saying that responding to Trump by refuting something he never actually said is kinda playing a game that we shouldn’t be playing.
Does he believe it? I have no idea, but I’d bet he does. Did he imply it? Maybe, but that happens in your head, not on the screen. I could easily come up with an interpretation of what he said that is (a) historically accurate and (b) completely consistent with what he actually said. Perhaps something like “Pershing executed nearly all the “terrorists” he captured. None of this namby pamby rules of engagement or due process for terrorists bullshit. And look – they were pretty well shut down for a generation.”*
It is Trump’s game to say something outrageous, you know, to draw outrageous responses, so that he can then circle back later and discredit the people who responded. Don’t play Trump’s game, or the DemOp’s game, is all.
*For illustrative purposes only. No idea if this is what actually happened.
I believe he’s said it explicitly off-Twitter, so it’s pretty clear what he meant. But, just like his trans comments, this is just trolling, not policy.
I don’t think that matters. It’s a Trump tweet, so a total shitshow
Maybe the answer is giving all the muslim nations blankets laced with smallpox, just like the US government didn’t do during the Indian Wars.
Fucking Ward Churchill, what an ass.
I was fortunate to have been educated in the UK where (at least up until my time at school) historically dubious events were clearly labelled as such, even when Anti-americanism was invoked (which was surprisingly common).
The “blankets” accusation is at least as old as the 1960’s – I was surprised to learn that Churchill was claimed to be the originator.
The bigger thing with Churchill is that he fabricated evidence to justify its historicity and planted it firmly into the discussion before he was discredited.
Honest to God, I can’t pick out the satirical replies from the sincere ones.
Isn’t that the point?
It’s my understanding, humor aside, that Black Jack was considerably less confrontational with the Moro than many of his contemporaries … which I suspect will be FAR too nuanced for the newsies to comprehend.
Everybody that’s clutching their pearls over this has obviously never been in a fight in their entire lives. Flagrant shit talking serves two very important purposes – it is a morale booster and a deterrent. Trump has proven himself to be quite adept at it to much humorous result. I hope he threatens to bend Maduro over and paint tits on his back next.
Some paranoid part of me is convinced he’s trying to bait the hysterics in the establishment into an actual coup attempt rather than a slo-mo political coup, so he can… take drastic action. Turkey style.
Quote of the day seen on Twitter. In response to the outing and forcing their employers to fire the varies evil Virginia Nazis someone said
“an outcast class of bright, reactionary, but unemployable young men with little to lose. What. Could. Possibly. Go. Wrong?”
Eh. Not so sure about bright. Some of their leadership is definitely somewhat intelligent but overall white nationalists tend to recruit from the low end of the white IQ pool. Just like the commies.
Well, for the foot-soldiers, sure.
Cadre? You want ones with some brains for that.
I don’t see Richard “I don’t understand Nietzsche but quote him anyway” Spencer as some grand wise leader either. Taylor’s pretty smart though.
Despite the claims to the contrary by their sympathizers, Lenin was a low IQ wanna be intellectual, Stalin was just a criminal degenerate, Hitler was a low IQ flunky failed artist, Mao was a deviant pervert. It really doesn’t take a very high IQ to be a monster.
Counterpoint: Nikki’s pretty smart.
She is a special kind of monster. The worst.
There’s nobody here to respond to that troll. You’ll have to go back to TOS for that,
TOS? I am a bit out of date on things. And what troll?
The Other Site
And if that wasn’t an open invitation for a spittle flecked response from mtrueman or Tony, I don’t know what is.
For the record, Stalin was quite intelligent; depraved, ruthless, sociopathic, and absolutely paranoid, but intelligent.
Stalin had an animal cunning that lead him to the top. Trotsky was just a degenerate monster.
He was intelligent in many ways. I would not call him a giant intellect by any stretch.
If you want some real fun, troll around some old IWW forums and look at the arguments over Stalin/Trotsky
The Original Site (aka The Site That Shall Not Be Named)
Scruffy is pointing out that Nikki didn’t make it over here.
Oops, misread the thread. Ignore the second half of my last post.
I would say it’s almost a requirement.
I think that tweet refers not to the white-nats but normies who dressed up as Hitler for a costume party one time and someone outed them, got them fired.
Oh, you mean Prince Harry?
Best Royal ever.
His Uncle Eddie was busted by the newspapers in the 90’s for dressing up as a Nazi too. Then, of course, his great-grand-uncle was pretty much an honorary member of the party too, before he retired to Bermuda with some Yankee bint.
Of course, what can you expect from the Saxe-Coburgs.
Climate change make them even worse
Not so sure about bright.
Not sure what the actual context of the quip was, but reading this more broadly to include other victims of the SJW mobs, I suspect Brendan Eich and Damore are both pretty smart.
Its true that the people fired so far (that we know of) for being actual alt-righters aren’t swimming in the deep end of the pool, as far as I know.
Folks, I do think the end of the world may be at hand. I found a Jack Dunphy column that, despite the silly police romanticization and general copsucking, is basically right.
Between this and the eclipse Monday, the end may well be at hand.
Blind squirrels, etc …
Interesting comment at Instapundit.
›
−
Avatar
Lars Ulno • 15 minutes ago
Rhodesia/Zimbabwe 1980: The 250k whites should feel welcome and can participate in our new society, where we export food to around the world, and our standard of living is better than England.
Zimbabwe 2000: We should take the land away from the remaining 100k whites and redistribute, even though they employ most of the population, we still export food to the world, and our standard of living is not that bad.
Zimbabwe 2010: We took the land away from the remaining 10k whites and gave it to our allies, and only 20% of the population is starving.
Zimbabwe 2017: We need to prosecute the remaining 100 whites, as 60% of our population is starving, we export nothing, and the country is devastated.
If you concede to leftists, and permit them to use some excuse (race, religion, etc) to scapegoat a population, you will not be able to buy peace and prosperity regardless of how far you retreat.
Something about the “live and let live” mentality rubs me funny. It’s not that we should force people to do or not do anything. It’s the moral ambivalence. IMO, libertarianism is about establishing boundaries where other people’s lives are “none of my business”, despite their choices being wrong (or idiotic or foolish). I think it’s profoundly stupid and morally diseased to lop your junk off, put on a dress, and make everybody call you Sally. If you ask my opinion, I’ll say as much. If you don’t, I’ll respect your boundaries as a sovereign individual.
Let’s not throw the moral baby out with the legal bathwater.
To draw an analogy:
This is a thing it seems many people get wrong about libertarians, sometimes even other libertarians, that just because you think something should be legal does not mean you should or do find it moral.
Riya sharma @riyasharma266 29m29 minutes ago
More
CNN be like “confederate statue driving van runs over a crowd of innocent people in Barcelona Spain today…
#Barcelona
I still find it amazing, the pearls of wisdom you can find on the intertoobz.
Economic agenda and racism is da sames!
Hurrrrr, durrrr, derpity derp.
No giant Papier-mâché heads. I haz a dissapoint.
I think it’s safe to say the Bryce is an idiot who relies on logical fallacies far too often.
I think it’s safe to say that anyone writing for New Republic is and idiot who must rely on logical fallacies. They were a little less reeking in desperation when they were scribbling fawning puff pieces for Hillary in the months before the election. Seems that since, like most of the media, they’ve had a complete emotional and mental breakdown.
Dr. Ben & Candy Carson
on Wednesday
Regarding all of the racial and political strife emanating from the events in Charlottesville last weekend, let me relate a story. Several years ago we bought a farm in rural Maryland. One of the neighbors immediately put up a Confederate flag. A friend of ours who is an African-American three-star general was coming to visit and immediately turned around concluding that he was in the wrong place. Interestingly, all the other neighbors immediately put up American flags shaming the other neighbor who took down the Confederate flag. More recently our home in Virginia along with that of a neighbor was vandalized by people who also wrote hateful rhetoric about President Trump. We were out of town, but other kind, embarrassed neighbors cleaned up most of the mess before we returned.
In both instances, less than kind behavior was met by people taking the high road. We could all learn from these examples. Hatred and bigotry unfortunately still exists in our country and we must all continue to fight it, but let’s use the right tools. By the way, that neighbor who put up the Confederate flag subsequently became friendly. That is the likely outcome if we just learn to be neighborly and to get to know each other.
Ben Carson is a really great guy. I don’t care how much varies leftist douchebags want to make fun of him.
Does he have a grain storage pyramid on his farm? I make fun of him too, he’s a strange one. But there’s a difference between poking fun at someone and the nasty attempts of character assassination by the left, just because he won’t stay on their plantation. I agree that he’s a good guy.
He is a little kooky but who isn’t?
That’s all class, that is.
And note the contrast between the (dare I say) deplorable behavior. The (presumably) racist neighbor flew a flag. The anti-Trumpers vandalized his house. Not even close to equivalent, in my book.
And note the contract in the outcomes – the neighbor is now friendly (honest to God, some of the people I know who say the most outrageously racist things are actually the same people who have done more than anyone else to help black and Latino kids in their town), but the people who vandalized his house? The people who vandalized his house, though – none of them came back to apologize or anything.
I’d rather have retrograde rednecks for neighbors than woke SJWs, no question.
I am a man. I am 100% straight and I really like females. I act like myself which most people consider masculine but not macho.
Everyone else is not my business, unless you are male also and I catch you in a public bathroom with my granddaughter. Then we will have a problem.
There are
XX
XY
XXY
XYY
XY/XX chimera
Not a continuous distribution, except for some variation among the chimeras.
It was a terrible post – nothing to argue about.
Eddie:
You’re a gigantic peice of shit. It’s too bad that you’re alive.
Don’t beat around the bush, Warty. Tell us how you really feel.
Who is Eddie? And nice to see you Warty.