I was led to believe there would be BuSab

gabydunn:

I’ve been thinking a lot about the use of the word “allowed” in debate. As in when comedians told feminist Lindy West, “So we’re not allowed to tell rape jokes now?!” People, in response to my appearance on ABC, have been saying, “So Gaby, we’re not allowed to make fun of people for screwing up publicly now? Huh? We’re not allowed.”
No one said anything about “allowed.” I don’t have any sort of power to make things legal or illegal. I can’t come to your house and “allow” or “disallow” you to do anything.
It’s funny how people are told to “buck up” but then when you say, “Hey, maybe you’re being a bit harsh to this person. Maybe consider their position and think about how your criticism of them might be affecting a real, complex fellow human being,” the person you say that to is ironically so offended and thin-skinned that they defensively tell you you’re not “allowing” them to do something. The only reason to react this way is if you’re aware, in some small part of you, that what you’re doing is incorrect. Otherwise, my opinion is irrelevant to you.
You’re allowed to do and think whatever you want. And I am allowed to go on national television and tell you you’re being unnecessarily mean. Look at that! Everyone is allowed to do any of those things.

That’s true, but it misses the point: when you feel guilt, it sucks. So you turn the guilt - that inward-facing self-hate - into shame. And if anyone else agrees with you, shame evaporates.

You make loud public statements that draw the hate of other people, until the force of the shame overpowers the force of the guilt (which is really easy, because no matter how well a person can hate themselves, you just can’t beat volume).
BUT once you make it public, you’ll also, invariably, find at least a few other people who have the same guilt, the same unwillingness to address that guilt, and the same willingness to pick a fight.

“Everyone is famous to 15 people, and that’s just enough people to help you sleep at night.
It is, in effect, crowdsourcing the superego…”
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/12/infidelity_and_other_taboos_me.html

I’ve been thinking a lot about the use of the word “allowed” in debate. As in when comedians told feminist Lindy West, “So we’re not allowed to tell rape jokes now?!” People, in response to my appearance on ABC, have been saying, “So Gaby, we’re not allowed to make fun of people for screwing up publicly now? Huh? We’re not allowed.”

No one said anything about “allowed.” I don’t have any sort of power to make things legal or illegal. I can’t come to your house and “allow” or “disallow” you to do anything.

It’s funny how people are told to “buck up” but then when you say, “Hey, maybe you’re being a bit harsh to this person. Maybe consider their position and think about how your criticism of them might be affecting a real, complex fellow human being,” the person you say that to is ironically so offended and thin-skinned that they defensively tell you you’re not “allowing” them to do something. The only reason to react this way is if you’re aware, in some small part of you, that what you’re doing is incorrect. Otherwise, my opinion is irrelevant to you.

You’re allowed to do and think whatever you want. And I am allowed to go on national television and tell you you’re being unnecessarily mean. Look at that! Everyone is allowed to do any of those things.

That’s true, but it misses the point: when you feel guilt, it sucks. So you turn the guilt - that inward-facing self-hate - into shame. And if anyone else agrees with you, shame evaporates.

You make loud public statements that draw the hate of other people, until the force of the shame overpowers the force of the guilt (which is really easy, because no matter how well a person can hate themselves, you just can’t beat volume).

BUT once you make it public, you’ll also, invariably, find at least a few other people who have the same guilt, the same unwillingness to address that guilt, and the same willingness to pick a fight.

“Everyone is famous to 15 people, and that’s just enough people to help you sleep at night.

It is, in effect, crowdsourcing the superego…”

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/12/infidelity_and_other_taboos_me.html

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

“

Unfortunately, this may be the information age, but it’s also the pro-male, blame the victim, slut-shaming age as well. Twenty-six-year-old corporate cyber security expert Deric Lostutter, also known as KYAnonymous, whose work played a key role in exposing this crime, could face up to 10 years in prison if he’s convicted of hacking. That sentence is five times longer than the ones given to the actual rapists themselves. … What a great message! ‘Hey — rape a woman and we’ll throw the book at you. Help catch and convict the rapist and we’ll throw a whole library at your face.’

—

John Fugelsand. http://current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/john-fugelsang-welcome-to-america-where-hacking-is-now-worse-than-raping/ (via jessygoska)

I’m not sure how to say this, but, isn’t it obvious that the expert is being prosecuted for usurping the power of the state? The government’s not mad because he found rapists, they’re mad because he did their job, better than they could, using powers they wish to reserve to themselves.

“We look like bad guys!

Incompetent bad guys!”

The message actually doesn’t have anything to do with rape, because, like the residents of Stuebenville, a young girl being sexually assaulted just isn’t important enough to suppress the reflexively ego-defense that comes when something threatens their power.

It’s the same message as Zero Tolerance policies in school: any violation of the established order - even defense of a helpless victim or a child - is criminal: ”It’s better for you if you just don’t get involved.”

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

basedgaben:

coolguyhat:

So the CEO of Sony just delivered the greatest burn I’ve seen in a while.

Got em

Yeah, that’s funny, but if the Kinect camera ever gets good enough to detect a bar code from 6’ away, how long before some marketing weasel starts running promotions based on what the console can see you consume?

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

niwandajones:

schakall:

blingostarr:

transhumanisticpanspermia:

cure-krismoth:

pathometric:

nationalpost:

No heroes allowed: Calgary student, 13, reprimanded for defending his classmate against a knife-wielding bully
Briar MacLean was sitting in class during a study period Tuesday, the teacher was on the other side of the room and, as Grade 7 bullies are wont to do, one kid started harassing another.

“I was in between two desks and he was poking and prodding the guy,” Briar, 13, said at the kitchen table of his Calgary home Friday.

“He put him in a headlock, and I saw that.”

He added he didn’t see the knife, but “I heard the flick, and I heard them say there was a knife.”

The rest was just instinct. Briar stepped up to defend his classmate, pushing the knife-wielding bully away.

The teacher took notice, the principal was summoned and Briar went about his day. It wasn’t until fourth period everything went haywire.

“I got called to the office and I wasn’t able to leave until the end of the day,” he said.

That’s when Leah O’Donnell, Briar’s mother, received a call from the vice-principal.

Ms. O’Donnell was politely informed the school did not “condone heroics,” she said. Instead, Briar should have found a teacher to handle the situation.

“I asked: ‘In the time it would have taken him to go get a teacher, could that kid’s throat have been slit?’ She said yes, but that’s beside the point. That we ‘don’t condone heroics in this school.’ ”

Instead of getting a pat on the back for his bravery, Briar was made to feel as if he had done something terribly wrong. The police were called, the teen filed a statement and his locker was searched. (Mike Ridewood for National Post)

what the hell?

Whoa, whoa, wait

“I asked: ‘In the time it would have taken him to go get a teacher, could that kid’s throat have been slit?’ She said yes, but that’s beside the point.

“She said yes, but that’s beside the point.” So basically she cared more about the fact a guy was ‘acting heroic’ than the fact that one of her students could have fucking been killed.

Honestly, this is exactly how a lot of schools view certain behaviors.

They’re more concerned about creating a culture they can easily control, than about the actual implications of that.

A student acting “heroic” is a student using their free will and is a variable the administration cannot control. Because many administrators are uptight idiots, this pisses them off.

It scares me how expendable human beings have become.

I want to throw up.

Holy hells. That’s fucking unbelievable.

Reminds me of a blog post from a few years ago:

“I’m not saying she should have fought him (and I’m not not saying it, either), but what kind of school doesn’t want a kid to stand up to a bully, especially when they’re doing it to help someone else? What kind of crazy school wants you to back down— and get someone else to protect you? What kind of school indoctrinates kids that power is only possessed by a) bad people; b) the state?

Oh. All of them.”

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/10/one_way_our_schools_are_traini.html

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

I’LL CONTINUE TO PRONOUNCE IT WITH A HARD “G” BECAUSE “JIF” IS PEANUT BUTTER.

I’ve never cared that the format’s creator says “jif,” because the .GIF extension is an acronym - it’s the Graphics Interchange Format.

Find me a person who says ‘jraphics’ and I’ll accept ‘jif’ as the correct pronunciation.

Reblogged from Injections for Some, Sweaty Manhugs for Others

niwandajones:

uhvataradvice:

netflix doesn’t have atla anymore :c

Goddammit.

All Nickolodeon content expired May 22. With Time Warner launching its (apparently terrible) Internet Archive, it was rumored Viacom was pulling all its content from Netflix (but who cares about shitty reality TV?).

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

Concerning WRECK-IT RALPH

niwandajones:

draconica:

srmanniac:

If Fix-it Felix Jr. had hit Vanellope with his hammer, would she still glitch?

Goddammit.

One presumes that would depend on when he hit her.

[SPOILER]

Before she crossed the finish line and her code was reconnected to the rest of the game, I assume yes, she would have still glitched. After, I think it would have ‘fixed’ her (but by that point she could control it and had learned to enjoy it, so it would’ve been a sort of inverse of when Ralph wrecks her car).

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

“

For the second year in a row, video game publisher Electronic Arts is on its way to being named “worst company in America,” according to Consumerist’s reader-voted poll. This year, the company has already defeated Facebook, Anheuser-Busch InBev and AT&T for the dubious honor. Today, EA faces Ticketmaster in a battle of who’s worse.

—

EA’s Peter Moore vows to ‘do better’ in response to ‘worst company in America’ poll | Polygon

gamers are the worst

banks bankrupt people and put them out on the streets and walk away with a smile, but oh no you didn’t like the ending to Mass Effect so your crybaby behind has to take a stand

(via iamdavidbrothers)

Offsides. Personal foul. Ten yards. Third down.

EA hasn’t faced off against a bank yet. I’m sure plenty of gamers will show up to vote for EA when it faces off against BOA, but let’s not be judgmental out of turn.

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

Reverse Racism: The Curious Case Of The White Underachiever

gradientlair:

Essay by a Gradient Lair guest writer, Asia Brown:

Last year, the Supreme Court agreed to review Fisher v. University of Texas. The case—a challenge to Grutter v. Bollinger, in which the constitutionality of race as a considerable factor in the college admission process was…

Um … so while I agree with the concept that people who fail at their goals and then turn to blaming nebulous minorities or “political correctness” or whatever for their failings are silly, maybe even contemptible people, that was probably the worst article I’ve ever read about reverse-racism (excluding those written by white people).

I mean, teenagers are generally pretty stupid, that’s the way life works. Assuming you’re immortal/invincible or greatly overvaluing your own worth might actually be a textbook description of adolescent psyches. There’s nothing remarkable about what Suzy Weiss said, or the way she said it. She wants you to be offended by how she said it so that you can confirm for her that everyone hates her for how bland and un-exotic she is. Frankly, everything she said was the kind of thing that, if you want to stay sane, you have to forgive any child for saying - with the obvious caveat that you must outgrow the desire to say such things before being taken seriously or treated with respect/like an adult, which leads us to the only truly remarkable thing about Weiss’ article:

Somewhere, somehow, adults of some sort thought what she had to say was important enough to publish it.

Asia could have skipped the thousand words of mocking a narcissistic teenager (pardon my redundancy) and dredging up examples from before the child in question was born and just said:

“Observe as white supremacy ruthlessly consumes its own dead!”

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

niwandajones:

privilegetoengtranslationservice:

Translation:

Atheists can’t be black or gay or women or transgender. Atheists experience an oppression that is worse than people who are black or gay or women or transgender.

And another piece of my soul dies.

Not to be a bigot, but when was the last time someone with a neckbeard said anything morally credible? Thoreau had grown a mustache by 1861, so 153 years ago?

Reblogged from ultraliberalwordmeister

(1/5) Next »