Elsewhere (221)
Robert Stacy McCain on the myth of the beauty myth:
One notices, of course, that feminists never criticise gay men for adoring male beauty, nor are lesbian preferences subject to feminist critique. No, in feminist discourse, it is only the heterosexual male’s attitudes and behaviour that are the target of this kind of “fuck your beauty standards” rhetoric.
Mark Bauerlein on the ideological desiccation of the humanities:
When English turned into a practice of reading literature for signs of racism, sexism, and ideology, it lost touch with why youths pick up books in the first place, said University of Virginia Professor Rita Felski. And Duke professor Toril Moi told the Chronicle of Higher Education, “If you challenge the idea of suspicion as the only mode of reading, you are then immediately accused of being conservative in relation to those politics.
Heather Mac Donald on progressive discipline policies and subsequent delinquency:
The idea that such street behaviour does not have a classroom counterpart is ludicrous. Black males between the ages of 14 and 17 commit homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic males of the same age. The lack of socialisation that produces such a vast disparity in murder rates, as well as less lethal street violence, inevitably will show up in classroom behaviour. Teens who react to a perceived insult on social media by trying to shoot the offender are not likely to restrain themselves in the classroom if they feel “disrespected” by a teacher or fellow students.
Joe Concha spies an asymmetry:
Democratic voters are almost three times as likely to have “blocked, unfriended, or stopped following someone on social media” after Donald Trump’s victory, according to a study… The survey shows considerable splits along gender lines as well. Women were “twice as likely as men to report removing people from their online social circle because of the political views they expressed online,” 18 percent to 9 percent, according to the study conducted by Daniel Cox and Robert P. Jones… Meanwhile, 5 percent of those polled said they will alter plans to spend less time with select members of their family because of their political views. This, too, showed a partisan divide: 10 percent of Democrats said they planned to avoid certain family members, and 2 percent of Republicans said they would do likewise.
Franklin Einspruch on fake fretting about fake news:
On Christmas Day, Jeremy Peters penned an article for the New York Times that ran under the headline “Wielding Claims of ‘Fake News,’ Conservatives Take Aim at Mainstream Media.” Its upshot is that a term once reserved for confabulated clickbait has been “appropriated” by conservatives for the sake of discrediting legitimate news that threatens their interests. “In defining ‘fake news’ so broadly and seeking to dilute its meaning, they are capitalising on the declining credibility of all purveyors of information, one product of the country’s increasing political polarisation,” Peters writes. “And conservatives, seeing an opening to undermine the mainstream media, a long-time foe, are more than happy to dig the hole deeper.” Was it on purpose that Peters identified the mainstream media —namely, himself— as a long-time foe of conservatives? Are conservatives incorrect about that assumption?
And Helena Cronin on equality, gender, and a zombie misconception:
Bear in mind that equality is not sameness. Equality is about fair treatment, not about people or outcomes being identical; so fairness does not and should not require sameness. […] Here’s some intriguing evidence. “Gender [theory]” predicts that, as discrimination diminishes, males and females will increasingly converge. But a study of 55 nations found that it was in the most liberal, democratic, equality-driven countries that divergence was greatest. The less the sexism, the greater the sex differences. Difference, this suggests, is evidence not of oppression but of choice; not socialisation, not patriarchy, not false consciousness, not even pink t-shirts or personal pronouns… but female choice.
Feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.
History repeats itself.
History repeats itself.
One might easily infer that the people complaining about “cake culture” and the crippling temptations of free pastries have no mental autonomy. I doubt that’s the intended effect, but still.
Bear in mind that equality is not sameness.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident!” she shouted, “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
[…]
“But that’s exactly what we have on Camazotz. Complete equality. Everybody exactly alike.”
For a moment her brain reeled with confusion. Then came a moment of blazing truth. “No!” she cried triumphantly. “Like and equal are not the same thing at all!”
“Good girl, Meg!” her father shouted at her.
But Charles Wallace continued as though there had been no interruption. “In Camazotz all are equal. In Camazotz everybody is the same as everybody else,” but he gave her no argument, provided no answer, and she held on to her moment of revelation.
Like and equal are two entirely different things.
Madeleine L’Engle had this figured out in a form even children could understand over forty years ago, but she was talking about Communism so we don’t give it any credence.
Watching the New York Times report on fake news is like getting a lecture about promiscuity from a syphilitic nun.
That.
From the comments to the Bauerlein piece:
First, we should use correct terms. No one–not faculty, not students–desires to “discuss” race, sex etc. in literature or art, any more than the recitation of the litany in church is a discussion of theology, or a discussion at all. You don’t discuss what you already are certain of; you expect, demand and enforce confessions of the faith from others.
Precisely. The Humanities are now nothing but “blessed recapitulation” of received wisdom, deviation from which is severely punished.
That.
Well, it’s quite a mindset on display. Claiming that conservatives (and non-leftists of all stripes) are wrongly attempting to “discredit” the New York Times as biased, unreliable, driven by a hostile narrative, etc., while admitting that said publication is a “a long-time foe” of the very same people.
With fake news and a lurid click-bait headline, the Washington Post beclowns itself.
Male feminist starter pack.
https://twitter.com/AlfredFam/status/815685457052835840
Male feminist starter pack.
Mr Smooth.
That.
I’m rather proud of that lede. Thanks for the feature, David.
Yes David it is on display unaware to its practitioners. Even in a life of engulfed in conservative religion , never met such dogmatic and intransiant “we b angels y’all are devil’s” as the typical college leftist. Unless you count Islam.
re The McCain piece,a remarkable thing is that some of the comments are actual useful and conversational. rtwt.
One notices, of course, that feminists never criticise gay men for adoring male beauty,
That conversation would be short. 🙂
That conversation would be short.
Most likely, yes. Though there are one or two outliers in the merry feminist cavalcade who are lecturing the rest of us that we should all be making ourselves feel sexually aroused by people we don’t want to have sex with. See, for instance, this.
So apparently on y’alls side of the pond you have a singer named Rebecca Ferguson? And she claims she will only sing Trump’s inaugural if she can sing a specific song about racism. Thing is I can find no proof she was ever asked to perform, she just implies it. Checked several news sources for this story, not one of them has a comment from Trump’s people. Smells like a publicity stunt on her part. Why would they ask someone unknown in the US, especially someone from outside the US, especially if Trump is the huge anti-trade, racist, SOB he is portrayed to be? Ferguson’s father is Jamaican, yes? Or is she an unknown over there as well?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/03/ive-left-twitter-unusable-anyone-but-trolls-robots-dictators-lindy-west
weep for me, for I weep for the world.
Conan! What is best in life?
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.
I think we’ve reached the “lamentation” stage:
http://linkis.com/thehill.com/blogs/in/uPhXl
To quote “OregonMuse” at AoSHQ:
Hey, when you write it all out, this stuff is like poetry.
Really bad poetry.
Who gives us this:
Because
Because
if there’s one thing
one thing
that normal Americans
normal Americans
Americans
want to listen to
want to listen to,
it’s a crapload
crapload
crapload
crapload
of virtue-signalling
virtue-signalling
condescending virtue-signalling
from smug celebrity
smug celebrity
douchebags.
douchebags.
douchebags.
smug celebrity douchebags.
::snort::
“A visual aid.”
Darn, shouldn’t have clicked on the link. Now I have to go out and find a 55 gallon barrel of chlorine bleach to get that image out of my mind.
If “unfriending” people doesn’t work, they’re just gonna have to start cutting themselves. Why, oh why, do we make them behave this way?
weep for me, I weep for the world
Actual quote from article: “Twitter, for the past five years, has been a machine where I put in unpaid work and tension headaches come out. I write jokes there for free. I post political commentary for free. I answer questions for free. I teach feminism 101 for free.”
Honey, no one is asking you to do this. Therefore, it is not unpaid work. It is your hobby. It doesn’t matter if you get paid for similar ‘work’ in different mediums. Again, no one is asking you to post on twitter
I enjoy sketching and painting. I’m not terrible. But I do it for pleasure (or occasionally to give as presents when I have no money to buy them). I do not consider this ‘unpaid work’ because I do not believe that I should be paid for these activities regardless of any demand.
Honey, no one is asking you to do this. Therefore, it is not unpaid work. It is your hobby… I do not believe that I should be paid for these activities regardless of any demand.
[ Slides cake and drink voucher along bar.]
weep for me, for I weep for the world.
Ms West, you’ll recall, is the termagant whose girth is such she struggled to squeeze into her plane seat and needlessly picked a fight with a male passenger, and who then found it amusing to deliberately knock him with her luggage as he tried to sleep. And who then wondered why “nobody wants to sit next to a fat person on a plane.” When not writing about herself for Jezebel and the Guardian, or testing the endurance of plane seats and fellow passengers, she makes videos of herself eating biscuits and junk food.
It’s curious how so many self-described “social justice” activists – in this case, a feminist and “fat activist” whose “work focuses on pop culture, social justice and body image” – seem saddled with deeply obnoxious personalities.
attempting to “discredit” the New York Times as biased, unreliable, driven by a hostile narrative, etc.,
Unreliable like this.
Ah, the New York Times, which once described the Tomb of the Holy Sepulchre as a place where Christians believe that Jesus is buried.
In fairness, they later issued a correction to “was buried”, but the initial mistake still makes me wonder what kind of other, less obvious howlers go unfixed.
“Twitter, for the past five years, has been a machine where I put in unpaid work… I teach feminism 101 for free.”
It’s rather like being handed a bill by a door-stepping Jehovah’s Witness.
it´s rather like being handed a bill by a door-stepping Jehovah’s Witness
Surely it’s worse. Witnesses are at least polite.
Btw I assume drinks vouchers are valid for single malts?
It’s rather like being handed a bill by a door-stepping Jehovah’s Witness.
Reminds me of an old joke, which requires extending one’s index fingers in front of one and jabbing them back and forth during the punchline:
Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons have inverted nipples?
Get off my porch!!
Why aren’t I getting paid to create these GIFs?! Waaah!
Incidentally, are Jehovah’s Witnesses still a thing? Do they still materialise on the doorsteps of random people?
Yep. In Florida, at least. Mormons as well. A Mormon friend advised that the best way to deal with JW’s is to tell them you’re Mormon. They will then politely wave or nod with an acknowledging smile and move on to the next house.
A Mormon friend advised that the best way to deal with JWs is to tell them you’re Mormon.
It’s one of those odd, slightly surreal memories from childhood. That two strange people would just appear at the door and invite you to join their theological gang. As if it were the kind of thing one does.
I used to be one of those two strange people appearing at the door, inviting people to join our theological gang. Only I did it in Colombia, in the 1980s, so none of you saw me.
Also, ~250,000 peeps per year join the Mormon theological gang worldwide, so apparently it is a thing one does, just not in Europe and environs.
In other news, Jeff Goldstein’s son Satchel is undergoing surgery to remove a pituitary tumor. It appears to be slow-growing, and he can supplement the hormones. #SatchelStrong
If you have “allies”, but no friends, then it’s pretty likely you have a Sarin-level toxic personality.
Also, ~250,000 peeps per year join the Mormon theological gang worldwide, so apparently it is a thing one does, just not in Europe and environs.
As noted upthread, the door-steppers do tend to be polite and I’ve no particular issue with the goods on offer. What I remember is the impression of social incongruity – hereabouts, at least. The fact that when you’ve answered the door and, after some momentary confusion, figured out what’s being offered, you then realise there’s no obvious social template for how to react. The sudden introduction of theological subject matter struck me as faintly surreal.
As noted upthread, the door-steppers do tend to be polite and I’ve no particular issue with the goods on offer. What I remember is the impression of social incongruity
I expect the zeitgeist has a lot to do with it. Certainly evangelizing strangers is a great deal less unusual in the southern United States, and the people I know there seem to know how to deal with it with aplomb (a polite “no, thank you” usually works, I am told). Also, in an age of instant communication a knock at the door being the first indication someone wants to drop by and socialize is unheard of today, but as a child growing up it was routine in my neighbourhood for the various housewives &c. to pop by unannounced for a chat.
Even though Canada is a secular nation proud of its general agnosticism (at least in the major cities), I am still taken aback by the sheer vitriol people around here direct at door-to-door missionaries who are unfailingly polite people. To hear them talk about the JWs dropping by, you’d think Hitler, Satan and Mike Harris had jointly dropped by to invite them to join their new baby-eating cult. I honestly don’t get it.
I am still taken aback by the sheer vitriol people around here direct at door-to-door missionaries who are unfailingly polite people.
Yes, I think ostentatious atheism can be much more grating. The worst I can say about the evangelists I remember is that they were gently confounding.
Incidentally, are Jehovah’s Witnesses still a thing? Do they still materialise on the doorsteps of random people?
In the SF Bay Area, they hang out at the Bart Stations and major foot traffic places such as local conference centers.
Assorted US election followups and follies . . .
Yep. In Florida, at least. Mormons as well. A Mormon friend advised that the best way to deal with JW’s is to tell them you’re Mormon. They will then politely wave or nod with an acknowledging smile and move on to the next house
I live in Florida and can attest to the validity of using Mormonism as a vaccine for JWs. (I don’t know you do I?) Offer to have them in to discuss key theological difference between the two doctrines and they will run like they are being chased by hell hounds. I am no longer a Mormon but keep my literature handy for just such an occasion.
Generally speaking Mormons don’t just swing by unless invited, sort of like vampire rules, but very clean cut and riding a bike. Never met more than a couple I didn’t like, which is more than can be said of most religions.
Why aren’t I getting paid to create these GIFs?! Waaah!
Because GIFs substituting for video are rarely funny and usually just a big waste of bandwidth?
I once went to a musical that was entirely about mocking Mormons (The book of Mormon), and not a single one of them tried to kill me! Just two young men in white shirts and ties holding the doors open for people and handing out literature. So, Mormons are alright. Then again, I can’t think of a single group of people that would have a violent reaction to a play mocking their religion…. 😀
A Mormon friend advised that the best way to deal with JW’s is to tell them you’re Mormon.
There are many ways equally effective, in the olden days, one fine Sunday morning I was fetching a cup of coffee when the doorbell rang and as I went to answer, my roommate, beer in hand, and his girlfriend beat me to it. He had the decency to be wearing his underwear, her, not so much. The two lads at the door just stared for a few seconds (she was easy on the eyes), said “sorry”, and walked away. We never got another hit from the JWs again, for some strange reason.
My favorite has been to look them straight in the eye, and in my best unaccented English say, “I’m ever so sorry, But I don’t speak English”. Most have taken the hint straight away. If one doesn’t, and wants to go into pest mode, you can have more fun by insisting you don’t speak English – “Yes, yes, I really quite understand that you are with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and would like to have a conversation about that, but really, it would be wasting both my time and yours, because I really don’t understand a word you are saying as I don’t speak English”. If they don’t take the hint after that, just close the door.
It is a good technique for various strangers, affiliated with reputable organizations or not, hitting you up for money, and for spam phone callers.
“sheer vitriol people around here direct at door-to-door missionaries”
Do Scientologists still go door-to-door?
My father used to love inviting JWs, Mormons and others in to discuss theology. He was genuinely interested in their opinions. Their eyes would start to bug when he mentioned that he was a tribal woman in Africa is his most recent former life, something he firmly believed. My Dad’s religion was a mixture of high church Episcopalian, Emanuel Swendenborg and Shirley MacLaine. If my mother was around, she would try to get them out the door before Dad brought out his healing crystals and started in on outer body experiences. He was a wonderful man, but he was an eccentric. I used to wonder what those poor people were thinking after they made their escape, but I guess you take your chances when you knock on random people’s doors.
Thanks for evoking the memory, David. I miss my Dad!
We’ve had JWs here in East Anglia. I politely explained that we went to the local Cathedral and were not interested in their message. The man was understanding; but the woman pointed to the antlers in our hall and cried, ‘Look, Satan lives in this house!’ At which point, I said a polite goodbye and closed the door.
the woman pointed to the antlers in our hall and cried, ‘Look, Satan lives in this house!’
In fairness, you have been spending time here.
“which is more than can be said of most religions”
Could you imagine what it would be like if we had Muslims going door-to-door trying to convert you to Islam? Probably threaten to behead you if you don’t convert.
” I am still taken aback by the sheer vitriol people around here direct at door-to-door missionaries who are unfailingly polite people.”
Not always…
Me: Hello, what do you want?
JW: [evasive non-responsive comment]
Me: What do you want?
JW: [2nd evasive non-responsive comment]
Me: What. Do. You. Want!
JW: I’m from the Wit///
Me: Go away.
Alternatively:
JW: Hi, I’m just here to update our files…
Me: Go away.
Seriously? ‘Update our files??’
I don’t know you do I?
Prolly not but perhaps we have mutual friends ;). Since befriending this Mormon (now former) co-worker I have found it quite interesting when the subject comes up among friends of mine whom he never even met. A very nice guy, granted with the usual human quirks. Yet the reaction of some people, especially non-religious types, even those of a non-religious-yet-conservative bent, is…something like enlightening and yet the opposite. And I really don’t get the big deal about answering the door to such people. It’s not like they show up once a month or so. Maybe once a year? Phone solicitors, and especially pollsters, are far, far more annoying. Yet some of these same people who bitch about Mormons will answer a pollster or give money to the “homeless vet” knocking on their window at traffic intersections. Now that latter bit is most disturbing. But hey, you can’t go there.
Around here (county of majority-minority black), we not only have the JVs and the Mormons, we have the local (African-) Baptist/Methodist etc., pairs come by. All have been very polite, but then I’ve always feigned hideous illness upon opening the door.
Re: Visual Aid. WHY do overly-large people insist on stripping down to show everyone how ok they are with their fat? I’m plump. But I know that I look much better when dressed attractively. Most people on the earth look their best when dressed with some style and consciousness of their own body’s quirks.
“The man was understanding; but the woman pointed to the antlers in our hall and cried, ‘Look, Satan lives in this house!’ “
*glances at collection of antique African hunting trophies in hall*
Please, next time, send her a couple of counties over!
*evil chuckle*
Do Scientologists still go door-to-door?
Interesting question . . . So are there any Scientologists around here who could comment, or are we all clear?
. . . the woman pointed to the antlers in our hall and cried, ‘Look, Satan lives in this house!’
Sooo, I keep reading of ostensible Christians and Muslims—assorted Iranian mullahs, Pat Robertson, Etc.—all stating various and assorted undoubted proofs of the presence of Satan And His Wiles—Great band name, that, I hear they opened for the Rockettes once.
Given such total and complete familiarity with S.A.H.W., wouldn’t that rather indicate that those stating such claims are quite dedicated and practicing Satanists? After all, who else would have such certainty?
And especially as such practice wouldn’t the least bit involve being anti Christian or anti Muslim: Quite by essential definition, Satanism is a subsect of Chrisitanity and Islam, just like any other subsect of Christianity or Islam . . . .
Satanism isn’t any part of Shinto, or the Norse worship, or classical Greek or Egyptian, or Buddhist . . . for some of those there is Loki, Set, and Mara, but they still just don’t tie into the Christian and Islamic mythos the way that being a Satanist does . . .
you then realise there’s no obvious social template for how to react.
Just say no thanks and shut the door.
Just say no thanks and shut the door.
Implausible as it may seem, I’m usually polite in real life, at least with people I don’t know, or don’t know well. I don’t default to being rude and dismissive* – and hence the momentary confounding.
*Except here, of course. Then all bets are off.
My favorite has been to look them straight in the eye, and in my best unaccented English say, “I’m ever so sorry, But I don’t speak English”. Most have taken the hint straight away.
I tried this one, more or less, a quarter century ago when I was studying in Russia just after the fall of the USSR. There were people trying to sell unsuspecting Westerners stuff all the time, and one day when a couple of men came up to me speaking in English, I responded — in German, figuring they’d get the hint. No, they didn’t switch to German (although there was one little old lady selling copies of a German-language newspaper I ran into another time!), they just started speaking English more slowly.
Hal: No, Satanism is a heresy of Christianity and to a lesser degree Islam, rather than a subset. Hyperbole aside, you’re reasoning that knowledge of the wiles the opposing party implies belonging to the opposing party – which is absurd. If anything it’s entirely the contrary that is more often true.
‘CBS’s blackout on the details of this story, and their competitors’ embargo of the story itself, dovetails perfectly with Iowahawk’s observation that “Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving,”’
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/253689/
I’ve always found Mormons and JWs to politely take a polite “no thanks” for an answer. But I live close to two Baptist churches, and when the Baptists come round they seem to have no social skills whatsoever. One Baptist actually put his foot in the door to prevent me closing it, and told me there was no sin I could have committed that was so terrible that God wouldn’t forgive.
I try to be polite, and I find most people are polite in return, but some people just won’t get the message unless you tell them to fuck off.
WHY do overly-large people insist on stripping down to show everyone how ok they are with their fat?
Maybe…
I am still taken aback by the sheer vitriol people around here direct at door-to-door missionaries who are unfailingly polite people. To hear them talk about the JWs dropping by, you’d think Hitler, Satan and Mike Harris had jointly dropped by to invite them to join their new baby-eating cult. I honestly don’t get it.
I used to frequent a Rugby League fansite’s forum based in the UK, which was populated mainly by demented lefties who thought socialism was great and all the world’s ills could be placed at the feet of Thatcher and America. They used to positively delight in boasting at how they told a JW to “fuck off” and slammed the door in their face, and how they are far too smart to believe in “sky fairies”. Yet they were forever leaping to the defence of “persecuted” Muslims and one of them even told of how he refrained from eating around a Muslim colleague during Ramadan out of “respect”. When I got older I realised they are cowards: abusing a JW made them feel tough because they knew the JWs were no threat.
and how they are far too smart to believe in “sky fairies”
And yet economic creationism is the height of sophistication.
So are there any Scientologists around here who could comment, or are we all clear?
I saw what you did there …
SumDumGuy,
Offer to have them in to discuss key theological difference between the two doctrines and they will run like they are being chased by hell hounds. I am no longer a Mormon but keep my literature handy for just such an occasion.
That’s exactly how my Seventh-Day Adventist mother dealt with them. But the Mormon missionaries were usually happy to have a theological discussion with her (she made some friends that way), Jehovah’s Witnesses, somewhat less so.
“One Baptist actually put his foot in the door to prevent me closing it, and told me there was no sin I could have committed that was so terrible that God wouldn’t forgive.”
A witty reply would have been “will he forgive me for breaking your collarbone with this iron bar if you don’t remove your foot from my door?”
“When I got older I realised they are cowards: abusing a JW made them feel tough because they knew the JWs were no threat.”
That explains sooooo much SJWism.
That explains sooooo much SJWism.
The psychology of “social justice” devotees seems to overlap with that of the archetypal ‘mean girls’ from school. The ones who would target a classmate for having an unfashionable bag or the wrong kind of shoes. The fact that so many of these warriors are female is not, I think, coincidental.
. . . Satanism is a heresy of Christianity and to a lesser degree Islam, rather than a subset.
Heresy, or subsect, or variation . . . .
Just as the Protestant variations are a heresy of the Roman Catholic variations, the current Roman Catholic variations are a heresy of the pre Vatican II variations, the pre Vatical II variations are a heresy of the current revealed Roman Catholics, all the Roman Catholic versions are a heresy of the protestant variations, the Sunni’s are a heresy of the Shias—the Shias are a heresy of the Sunnis—, Christianity is a heresy of Islam, Islam is a heresy of Christianity, and Judaism . . . . .
Satanism thus really does just fit in with all the other Abrahamic squabbling cousins that are all—Satanism included, by this point— equal to each other and all repelling each other, each peddling a faith that claims to be religion instead of just being mere faith . . .
And, mainly, they’re all—Satanism included—of the same Abrahamic faith cluster, not from anywhere else, so yes, Satanism just is a standard subsect of Christianity and Islam . . . .
—Definitely granted, it’s not one of the popular subsects among the Christians/Muslims, but then that set of 95 theses arguably only recently got nailed to the general door . . .
Have y’all seen this?
. . . Satanism is a heresy of Christianity and to a lesser degree Islam, rather than a subset.
Heresy, or subsect, or variation . . . .
Yes, indeed, this is one of those irregular verbs:
You are a pious and blessedly proselytizing adherent of the universally acknowledged one true faith.
I am a dearly beloved cousin who merely offers a slight variation in opinion.
David is an eternally damned heretic and will spend all eternity roasting in hell and being reborn endlessly as a never evolving microbe.
—Why of course David’s lot makes no sense whatsoever, we’re discussing faith rather than religion. Faith is apparently rather required to be utterly intellectual and also complete gibberish—and besides, doing “heresy” is also rather often where the next faith comes from . . .
Apparently, this is what Laurie Penny thinks of people who aren’t sufficiently leftwing.
Have y’all seen this?
Scanned only a few seconds, but enough to note it being for local, Western hemispheric consumption. —The Middle Eastern targeting variety would have been Real Housewives of DAESH . . .
Apparently, this is what Laurie Penny thinks of people who aren’t sufficiently leftwing.
I expect Newt Gingrich, et al, prolly rather announced the same eight years ago, with only the change in gutter.
At least for the majority of us in between; Same game, same lob, really.
Watching the New York Times report on fake news is like getting a lecture about promiscuity from a syphilitic nun.
That.
In a continuing sort of occurrence, Oops.
Don’t forget that progressivism is a heresy of leftism, which is a heresy of liberalism, which is a heresy of libertarianism, which is a heresy of Unitarianism, which is a heresy of Calvinism, which is a Christian heresy, and nationalism is a heresy of early leftism, conservatism is a heresy of late leftism, and in the words of dril, blocked, blocked, blocked, none of you are free of sin.
CBS’s blackout on the details of this story, and their competitors’ embargo of the story itself, dovetails perfectly with Iowahawk’s observation that “Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving,”
I see the story’s getting traction now, albeit belatedly, most likely under pressure and with some quite perverse attempts to downplay the obvious racial element. What’s striking – aside from the sadism and depravity – is the fact that the perpetrators shared their behaviour online, presumably for the amusement of likeminded peers. Which suggests that such inclinations are not entirely uncommon in their social environment.
As we were saying . . . .
Seems awfully familiar . . .
Which suggests that such inclinations are not entirely uncommon in their social environment.
The other day as I was going from here to there, one of the sights was a white hipster in a sarong—in 40 degree F. weather—, sneakers with one sock, cell phone playing rap, whose quite bellowed goodbye to a friend was Fuck 2016!!! Fuck Trump!!!
Apparently, this is what Laurie Penny thinks of people who aren’t sufficiently leftwing.
The suck-up comments are quite nice, except for one guy who apparently disagrees and gets a dose of restaurant grade introspection failure:
They really don’t get why people to the right of them are laughing at them.
restaurant grade introspection failure
To quote some guy, lefties project.
Spiny,
That’s exactly how my Seventh-Day Adventist mother dealt with them. But the Mormon missionaries were usually happy to have a theological discussion with her (she made some friends that way), Jehovah’s Witnesses, somewhat less so.
Mormon’s have a large school dedicated to teaching their missionaries how to be proper missionaries, not the vacationarries you get in most religions. As a result they are usually very well versed in the Book of Mormon, the Bible, and several other religious texts of which they make use; and are more than happy to discuss any of the above. They also dedicate a large portion of church services to religious study and encourage their members to study daily which makes them overall a fairly well informed group, although this may have changed in the 25 odd years since left the church.
I see the story’s getting traction now, albeit belatedly . . .
Chicago police explain why they think beating was hate crime
Updated 1:13 pm, Thursday, January 5, 2017
Oh, speaking of bad faith and fake news . . .
Creationist: Beowulf is ‘eyewitness account’ of dinosaurs existing with humans
“In a continuing sort of occurrence, Oops.”
Maybe the march will have a lot of mangina owners marching in it…
The Middle Eastern targeting variety would have been Real Housewives of DAESH . . .
Er, yes. It would have been in Arabic. Or is there a subtler point you are attempting to make?
Er, yes. It would have been in Arabic.
?????
Why Arabic? Isis is a classical Egyptian goddess, Daesh is the collection of gits getting pelted with virtual rotten vegetables . . .
A good way to dissuade the JWs and Mormons is to remove clothing one item at a time while they’re talking. Once I got down to boxer shorts before two Mormon boys fled.