Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:13 pm
What color was the sea lion? :whistle:
Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/
Thus the new definition of proof in online debate is to say something untrue of a person and then when the person says it’s untrue cite that as proof of them saying it. It’s just like Monty Python’s “Jehovah” sketch from Life of Brian except without the intelligence or humour.
And then there is the third and laziest response, which is to simply ignore all facts both real and imagined and dismiss the argument based on the colour of the person making it. Thus whatever a white man says about history is inherently racist and wrong and if such an argument is championed by a brave indigenous woman like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price she is dismissed as a racist enabler.
And of course if you are accused of being a racist you cannot deny being a racist because racists don’t get to decide whether they are racist or not. This logic is straight from the Salem Witch Trials, although again without the intelligence or humour.
And of course if none of that works anyone the hard left disagrees is simply told to “shut the f*** up”.
And so this is the world we have become. A world where people comb through texts for something to be outraged about or try to force people to say things that they can be outraged about or just call people racist and then get outraged by how racist they are.
The facts don’t matter in public debate anymore. All that matters is whether something fits within a pre-constructed “correct” narrative; if not it is deemed offensive. If something upsets somebody then it cannot be true.
The fuckers already are. There are a number of reports of them biting swimmers and people in kayaks. A little girl was dragged off of a wharf near Vancouver and into the water awhile ago but fortunately was rescued quickly and unhurt. A scuba diver was killed a hundred miles north of here by a large Stellers Sea lion that almost certainly wasn't even used to people.The sea lions are protected and they are fuckers. Give it a few years and they will be a threat to safety.
It was black! Are you saying it just wanted to piss on the dog? :drool:Service Dog wrote: ↑ What color was the sea lion? :whistle:
I'm ~%5 myself, and only one of my parents hails from the island.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑It wouldn't surprise me if she was a mixture of Taino/Spanish like a pretty good proportion of people from Puerto Rico.Service Dog wrote: ↑ 7m40s Ocasio-Cortez claims to be descended from 'Native People'
Unknown, but sources report seeing a flash of red as it dived back under water, and hearing a lilting Gaelic voice on the wind.Service Dog wrote: ↑ What color was the sea lion? :whistle:
A good piece by Joe.Brive1987 wrote: ↑ A reasonable take on the state of the Pit world today.
https://www.news.com.au/national/joe-hi ... e203baf862
Thus the new definition of proof in online debate is to say something untrue of a person and then when the person says it’s untrue cite that as proof of them saying it. It’s just like Monty Python’s “Jehovah” sketch from Life of Brian except without the intelligence or humour.
And then there is the third and laziest response, which is to simply ignore all facts both real and imagined and dismiss the argument based on the colour of the person making it. Thus whatever a white man says about history is inherently racist and wrong and if such an argument is championed by a brave indigenous woman like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price she is dismissed as a racist enabler.
And of course if you are accused of being a racist you cannot deny being a racist because racists don’t get to decide whether they are racist or not. This logic is straight from the Salem Witch Trials, although again without the intelligence or humour.
And of course if none of that works anyone the hard left disagrees is simply told to “shut the f*** up”.
And so this is the world we have become. A world where people comb through texts for something to be outraged about or try to force people to say things that they can be outraged about or just call people racist and then get outraged by how racist they are.
The facts don’t matter in public debate anymore. All that matters is whether something fits within a pre-constructed “correct” narrative; if not it is deemed offensive. If something upsets somebody then it cannot be true.
It's fascinating to contemplate (briefly, there are jobs to be done around the house) that we contain the genotypes of many erased cultures.d4m10n wrote: ↑I'm ~%5 myself, and only one of my parents hails from the island.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑It wouldn't surprise me if she was a mixture of Taino/Spanish like a pretty good proportion of people from Puerto Rico.Service Dog wrote: ↑ 7m40s Ocasio-Cortez claims to be descended from 'Native People'
Evidently the genotype lives on, despite wholesale cultural erasure.
A well known selkie.ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑Unknown, but sources report seeing a flash of red as it dived back under water, and hearing a lilting Gaelic voice on the wind.Service Dog wrote: ↑ What color was the sea lion? :whistle:
First, Gov. Ralph Northam admitted wearing blackface in the 1980s. Then, Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax was accused of sexual assault, which he adamantly denies, stemming from a 2004 encounter. Finally, Attorney General Mark Herring admitted he, too, donned blackface in the 1980s.
This is true in online dogpiles. And it's something that all sides use, whenever it's convenient.Brive1987 wrote: ↑ A reasonable take on the state of the Pit world today.
https://www.news.com.au/national/joe-hi ... e203baf862
Thus the new definition of proof in online debate is to say something untrue of a person and then when the person says it’s untrue cite that as proof of them saying it. It’s just like Monty Python’s “Jehovah” sketch from Life of Brian except without the intelligence or humour.
And then there is the third and laziest response, which is to simply ignore all facts both real and imagined and dismiss the argument based on the colour of the person making it. Thus whatever a white man says about history is inherently racist and wrong and if such an argument is championed by a brave indigenous woman like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price she is dismissed as a racist enabler.
And of course if you are accused of being a racist you cannot deny being a racist because racists don’t get to decide whether they are racist or not. This logic is straight from the Salem Witch Trials, although again without the intelligence or humour.
And of course if none of that works anyone the hard left disagrees is simply told to “shut the f*** up”.
And so this is the world we have become. A world where people comb through texts for something to be outraged about or try to force people to say things that they can be outraged about or just call people racist and then get outraged by how racist they are.
The facts don’t matter in public debate anymore. All that matters is whether something fits within a pre-constructed “correct” narrative; if not it is deemed offensive. If something upsets somebody then it cannot be true.
Are you sure about that?
A pretty tendentious question, especially since it came as an answer to an argument I had made about how flimsy is the case for considering fascism a "progressive movement".Kirb. Be honest.
Are you a “friendly fascist”?
Here you attribute to my "muslim whispering" that I want to place "as many people" from muslim-traditionalist countries into secular countries. Which is a straw man, or more charitable a huge exaggeration, that you use to dismiss my arguments.Kirb’s Muslim whispering celebrates placing as many people from the bottom left into the top right.
A) because it’s a liberal aspiration to be “colour blind”
B) because he has a truck load of Two Treatises of Government and he gets 15% commission.
C) someone told him the self expression value is a constant and not a variable
http://i.imgur.com/NG3QtMP.jpg
And I could go on. Are you sure that this tactic of yours is very different from the tactics used by the Social Justice brigade?Oh look. An Asian Aussie Journo condescended to watch Crocodile Dundee only to be struck by its 1980s Anglo identity.
Thanks Kirb for civic nationalism.
Don't you remember? . Count Dankula's judge decided that context doesn't matter any more. So that's the end of the matter thankyou. :snooty:Brive1987 wrote: ↑ A reasonable take on the state of the Pit world today.
https://www.news.com.au/national/joe-hi ... e203baf862
Thus the new definition of proof in online debate is to say something untrue of a person and then when the person says it’s untrue cite that as proof of them saying it. It’s just like Monty Python’s “Jehovah” sketch from Life of Brian except without the intelligence or humour.
And then there is the third and laziest response, which is to simply ignore all facts both real and imagined and dismiss the argument based on the colour of the person making it. Thus whatever a white man says about history is inherently racist and wrong and if such an argument is championed by a brave indigenous woman like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price she is dismissed as a racist enabler.
And of course if you are accused of being a racist you cannot deny being a racist because racists don’t get to decide whether they are racist or not. This logic is straight from the Salem Witch Trials, although again without the intelligence or humour.
And of course if none of that works anyone the hard left disagrees is simply told to “shut the f*** up”.
And so this is the world we have become. A world where people comb through texts for something to be outraged about or try to force people to say things that they can be outraged about or just call people racist and then get outraged by how racist they are.
The facts don’t matter in public debate anymore. All that matters is whether something fits within a pre-constructed “correct” narrative; if not it is deemed offensive. If something upsets somebody then it cannot be true.
Another trick that can work in Firefox at least is to hit the Esc key before the subscription popup appears. Needs careful timing to get it after the text has loaded but before the popup, and doesn't work in all cases. Also, you can paste the URL into google and use the "view cached version" for some instances.screwtape wrote: ↑ I was idly toying with the Globe & Mail's webpage this morning, and spotted a Margaret Wente headline that looked interesting, but it had the little key icon under it that signifies subscribers only. That itself is curious, as the G&M has tried to rid itself of her as she doesn't align with their politics in the required seamless fashion, so I assumed the article ("Can Canada Avoid a Populist Revolt?) was considered spicy enough to be worth hiding leaving the title as bait for potential subscribers.
Anyway, my point. Noticing the text briefly appears before being replaced with a demand for subscription payment, I thought I ought to be able to get at it. Eventually, I did. This is Firefox 65, with uBlock Origin set to allow 3rd party scripts on theglobeandmail.com. Click on the article, get a page with title and request for subscription. Click on the Reader view icon in the address bar, get a different version of the same page. Refresh - and there is the reader version of the article.
This doesn't work with Vivaldi (Chromium-based), and did work with Safari, and oddly enough, after doing it in Safari now all the subscriber pages just open without the above trick.
And after all that, here is the curious article:
► Show Spoiler
And, if you want to read a page that blocks ad-blockers, hit whatever your 'cancel page load' key combo is (CMD-. on my mac) very quick. You can at least then clip the text if not read it straight.screwtape wrote: ↑ Anyway, my point. Noticing the text briefly appears before being replaced with a demand for subscription payment, I thought I ought to be able to get at it. Eventually, I did. This is Firefox 65, with uBlock Origin set to allow 3rd party scripts on theglobeandmail.com. Click on the article, get a page with title and request for subscription. Click on the Reader view icon in the address bar, get a different version of the same page. Refresh - and there is the reader version of the article.
This doesn't work with Vivaldi (Chromium-based), and did work with Safari, and oddly enough, after doing it in Safari now all the subscriber pages just open without the above trick.
It's all an act, he's playing a part, he's a performance artist. Or he's as mad as a bucket of frogs. :character-kermit:free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Hell hath no fury like an internet crackpot scorned. Alex Jones doesn't love Joe Rogan anymore and Jesus told him squash him like a Kraken would squash a puny sailor.
A bold and articulate reply. I hope those voices are heeded, but I doubt it. There really needs to be a new, international psychology board, based on science and as free from partisanship as possible. The APA is a festering dunghole, and I doubt that any real change is possible within the community.
Why not both?shoutinghorse wrote: ↑It's all an act, he's playing a part, he's a performance artist. Or he's as mad as a bucket of frogs. :character-kermit:free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Hell hath no fury like an internet crackpot scorned. Alex Jones doesn't love Joe Rogan anymore and Jesus told him squash him like a Kraken would squash a puny sailor.
It’s true there was a red flag convergence of POVs. I don’t think you or Kirb understood the original article. It’s point wasn’t to deny the freedom to criticise. Or even criticise badly. Probably worth a second read.
Sometimes blocking javascript on the page will stop the anti adblock notice. I use a Chrome extension.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑And, if you want to read a page that blocks ad-blockers, hit whatever your 'cancel page load' key combo is (CMD-. on my mac) very quick. You can at least then clip the text if not read it straight.screwtape wrote: ↑ Anyway, my point. Noticing the text briefly appears before being replaced with a demand for subscription payment, I thought I ought to be able to get at it. Eventually, I did. This is Firefox 65, with uBlock Origin set to allow 3rd party scripts on theglobeandmail.com. Click on the article, get a page with title and request for subscription. Click on the Reader view icon in the address bar, get a different version of the same page. Refresh - and there is the reader version of the article.
This doesn't work with Vivaldi (Chromium-based), and did work with Safari, and oddly enough, after doing it in Safari now all the subscriber pages just open without the above trick.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -2020.htmlOne in six of all on-screen BBC roles must go to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender or disabled people by 2020, the corporation's new diversity targets state.
Have you considered how licensing bodies in general control the thoughts, attitudes and actions of licensees? I can't speak for all, but I have direct knowledge of medical licensing bodies. If they assume some particular attitude - be it some aspect of equality, tolerance or other PC-ness - you'd better go along with it or be open to censure for any complaint raised against you for not mouthing the correct platitudes. It was always recognised that family doctors acted as gatekeepers to the rest of the system, but now they have to sign the appropriate chit for, say, disability, whether due to gender dysphoria, morbid obesity, or Brexit anxiety. Decline to do so and you lose your license. Some of this is because of an undue willingness for such bodies to be seen to be modern and 'with it', but bizarrely some part of it is also an attempt to maintain the self-regulating aspect of a profession. We are told we must regulate ourselves in a manner that the public at large approves, or be subject to government control. While this might be an aspect of medical regulation that applies only in single-payer systems, it has sadly come to mean that the licensing bodies, and the physicians who choose to make a career in them, have become subservient to the public will. Invite well-meaning civilians to comprise 50% of all committees. Let civilians judge all complaint issues. Publish all complaints, proven or not, against physicians. And so on and so forth. We don't dare say no to a ridiculous request, but go along with whatever our taxpayer masters require of us. Exactly what the market forces would predict.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑A bold and articulate reply. I hope those voices are heeded, but I doubt it. There really needs to be a new, international psychology board, based on science and as free from partisanship as possible. The APA is a festering dunghole, and I doubt that any real change is possible within the community.
Mercedes Carrera Issues Statement on Child Sex Abuse AllegationsBrive1987 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:29 pmA fairly balanced review.
A less balanced one.Code: Select all
https://youtu.be/JzOE7hRSyS8
Code: Select all
https://twitter.com/mykerurevenge/status/1093900131274027008?s=21
142 commentsFor those unaware, Mercedes Carrera, a porn star who supported GamerGate and collaborated on a charity with The Fine Young Capitalists, has been arrested on allegations of child sex abuse with a child under the age of 10. A lot of anti-GamerGate types have seized on all this in spite of their own history of defending admitted pedophiles in their own camp, to try and lord it over us despite many condemning her and others withholding judgment yet saying if true she should receive a harsh sentence. She has now put out a statement to adult entertainment news sites offering her side of the story:I would note that, if the circumstances she describes are correct and it involves a custody dispute, this does generally mean it is more likely the allegation is false than otherwise. Such tactics are unfortunately more common in those cases. This does not mean the allegations are false, but it is something to keep in mind for people who may feel tempted to rush to judgment.Last week, my husband and I [were] arrested on charges of molesting my nine-year-old daughter, the absolute worst crime I can imagine. The charges were filed by her father, my ex-partner (a fundamentalist Christian). He is trying to take custody of our child from me. The charges are absolutely false and horrifying, and a last ditch effort to keep me from contact with my daughter for the rest of my life. I am so worried for her. Her life is shattered. Life will never be the same for any of us. We are struggling to make sense of this nightmare. This is a no-bail offense, so we are stuck in jail until we are cleared. We are facing decades in prison and do not even have money for a lawyer. We do not know what to do, but I ask that you all know me for who I am, and know that neither I nor my husband would ever, ever do anything like this to any child, let alone my beloved daughter.
Code: Select all
https://imgur.com/a/1hTDcNs
An impressive portfolio for sure.Service Dog wrote: ↑ Plus, I got to chat with my favorite model, backstage. First time, since I worked on a show with her 2 years ago.
Apparently, she's a big deal now.
https://www.instagram.com/uglyworldwide/?hl=en
Yep. Leading to anti-science feelgoodery. And licensing bodies to exist mostly for the sake of being necessary and self-perpetuating.screwtape wrote: ↑Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:33 pmHave you considered how licensing bodies in general control the thoughts, attitudes and actions of licensees? I can't speak for all, but I have direct knowledge of medical licensing bodies. If they assume some particular attitude - be it some aspect of equality, tolerance or other PC-ness - you'd better go along with it or be open to censure for any complaint raised against you for not mouthing the correct platitudes. It was always recognised that family doctors acted as gatekeepers to the rest of the system, but now they have to sign the appropriate chit for, say, disability, whether due to gender dysphoria, morbid obesity, or Brexit anxiety. Decline to do so and you lose your license. Some of this is because of an undue willingness for such bodies to be seen to be modern and 'with it', but bizarrely some part of it is also an attempt to maintain the self-regulating aspect of a profession. We are told we must regulate ourselves in a manner that the public at large approves, or be subject to government control. While this might be an aspect of medical regulation that applies only in single-payer systems, it has sadly come to mean that the licensing bodies, and the physicians who choose to make a career in them, have become subservient to the public will. Invite well-meaning civilians to comprise 50% of all committees. Let civilians judge all complaint issues. Publish all complaints, proven or not, against physicians. And so on and so forth. We don't dare say no to a ridiculous request, but go along with whatever our taxpayer masters require of us. Exactly what the market forces would predict.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑A bold and articulate reply. I hope those voices are heeded, but I doubt it. There really needs to be a new, international psychology board, based on science and as free from partisanship as possible. The APA is a festering dunghole, and I doubt that any real change is possible within the community.
Which planet is she from, if you don't mind me asking.Service Dog wrote: ↑ Plus, I got to chat with my favorite model, backstage. First time, since I worked on a show with her 2 years ago.
Apparently, she's a big deal now.
https://www.instagram.com/uglyworldwide/?hl=en
I was just wondering the same. This truly is proof that beings from another world are living among us. :sci-fi-grayalien:KiwiInOz wrote: ↑Which planet is she from, if you don't mind me asking.Service Dog wrote: ↑ Plus, I got to chat with my favorite model, backstage. First time, since I worked on a show with her 2 years ago.
Apparently, she's a big deal now.
https://www.instagram.com/uglyworldwide/?hl=en
I understand that she has an exclusive deal modeling Otto Sump's new range of clothes.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑I was just wondering the same. This truly is proof that beings from another world are living among us. :sci-fi-grayalien:KiwiInOz wrote: ↑Which planet is she from, if you don't mind me asking.Service Dog wrote: ↑ Plus, I got to chat with my favorite model, backstage. First time, since I worked on a show with her 2 years ago.
Apparently, she's a big deal now.
https://www.instagram.com/uglyworldwide/?hl=en
MarcusAu wrote: ↑I understand that she has an exclusive deal modeling Otto Sump's new range of clothes.
https://i.imgur.com/2frf58y.png
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... n-man.htmlDeputy Judge Jason Coppel QC issued an interim injunction that bans her from posting any personal information about Miss Hayden on social media, 'referencing her as a man' or linking her to her 'former male identity'.