|
That's the damaging bit.
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
That, and it presents an image of "it's okay to be stupid and/or incompetent", something we certainly need more of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
TerminalSaint posted:That's the damaging bit. Yeah, but it's contradictory with the image that started this tangent, in that women aren't allowed to have positive body image until they grant that same right to men. Which just sounds like "why won't those bitches sleep with me?" whining. You can't really say that "you must conform to this unattainable standard" is more damaging than "who cares what you look like, you're a loveable slob anyway  " because the latter isn't damaging at all. If some dude wants to blame his unfuckability on his body type in spite of that message, go nuts, but that's just a ball of issues and nonsense I don't even care to unravel.
boner confessor fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Sep 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Now that we're on the precipice of a MRA/Rape Culture discussion, have todays batch of insane poo poo from my facebook feed: Islam = Communism = Bad.  Global Warming.  Uhhhhhhhhhh.  The final macro was from somebody that doesn't believe that one could make ~10 million dollars from a best selling book or three, so therefore Obama is "skimming off the top" of the money the IRS has stolen from the teaparty. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
But it's laid over a picture of a goofy cat, it must be true
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
Lord Girlyman posted:Global Warming. "the Arctic ice has actually gotten THICKER this year, checkmate libtards" is seriously the most disingenuous poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 20:30
|
|
|
So after you posted that "Communist Manifesto/Sharia law" thing, I remembered that several of the demands in the Manifesto are unrestrictedly good ideas (like 2 and 10), and wanted to glance at the original wording. And found this. http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html quote:ARE Americans practicing Communism?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:How is it damaging to male body image for society to say that it doesn't matter what you look like, you're still the star of the show with a hot wife? If anything it reinforces the idea that males are entitled to sex with attractive women. I wasn't referring to male body issue, it's more of a male mental issue. It's ok to be dumb and incompetent, you're a guy, you'll get a hot wife that will look after you and do things for you anyway. It sends a poor message to young men/boys and I think it is a contributing (but not only!) factor in the whole Mens Rights BS. It is contradictory to the previous statement, I wasn't disagreeing with it. I was just adding another aspect of sitcoms portrayal of the sexes. Women have to worry about beauty to attract men, men just have to be dumb, fat, oafs. Neither one is a positive message. VVV Exactly. The whole drat thing is hosed. FlyingCheese fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Sep 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
FlyingCheese posted:I wasn't referring to male body issue, it's more of a male mental issue. It's ok to be dumb and incompetent, you're a guy, you'll get a hot wife that will look after you and do things for you anyway. It sends a poor message to young men/boys and I think it is a contributing (but not only!) factor in the whole Mens Rights BS. Yeah it's a generally unspoken truth that men are also victims of the patriarchy, in different ways. Smash it and liberate everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:"the Arctic ice has actually gotten THICKER this year, checkmate libtards" is seriously the most disingenuous poo poo. For a group of people who position themselves as being focused on the past, they sure seem to ignore it most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
Lord Girlyman posted:For a group of people who position themselves as being focused on the past, they sure seem to ignore it most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
I see chubby, dumb and not too attractive guys go home with very attractive women fairly regularly in my line of work. I don't know where that image's creator gets the idea that women DON'T already see men as attractive for reasons outside of their physical appearance. It really does have everything to do with confidence and a charming personality, in my experience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:You can't really say that "you must conform to this unattainable standard" is more damaging than "who cares what you look like, you're a loveable slob anyway Disney princesses, romantic comedies and rich-girl TV dramas present the unattainable standard for men. But it's presented to women, so we aren't like "sigh, why can't I be flawlessly handsome, rich, and simultaneously strong and a total pushover who likes a girl with no obvious charms?" we're just like "WTF is wrong with these women?" Not that porn or anime haven't done something similar to some men.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 00:49
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Disney princesses, romantic comedies and rich-girl TV dramas present the unattainable standard for men. But it's presented to women, so we aren't like "sigh, why can't I be flawlessly handsome, rich, and simultaneously strong and a total pushover who likes a girl with no obvious charms?" we're just like "WTF is wrong with these women?" That's where MRAs miss the point so much - they talk about unrealistic bodies in media but they completely ignore who that media is aimed at. Ridiculously proportioned women in superhero comics is a male sexual fantasy, but ridiculously proportioned men aren't (by design, anyway) a female sexual fantasy in the same way: they're a male power fantasy. Men in porn traditionally don't look the way they do to appeal to women, and given the labor conditions and relative worker power for men in porn, they're certainly not valued by producers who know that a man in the shoot just has to look a certain way for it to be successful. Because for most porn the male body is just a replaceable stand-in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
Saw this on facebook tonight:  "Don't be that guy, opt out of Obamacare, save money!" I started to type a reply, but I just unfriended instead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
Dirt posted:Saw this on facebook tonight: That's one of the laziest graphics I've ever seen. Literally no thought was put behind that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 03:48
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:That's one of the laziest graphics I've ever seen. Literally no thought was put behind that. Yeah, that's literally just 'THING BAD'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:Yeah, that's literally just 'THING BAD'. The guy who shared is probably dumb enough to be swayed by internet memes. I am losing hope for the future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Dirt posted:Saw this on facebook tonight: "I wonder how much health insurance costs the crewmembers onboard the Enterprise... it's a risky assignment, I bet it costs them a lot." 
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
What does "opt out of Obamacare" even mean? It's like nobody told these idiots that it's not UHC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
I'm still depressed that the majority of Americans were in favor of single-payer or UHC when they were explained, but against them when simply referred to by name. So glad I'm moving to Canada.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:What does "opt out of Obamacare" even mean? It's like nobody told these idiots that it's not UHC. Building on this, sorry for starting a derail, but what's with the talking point that "If Obamacare's so great, why did Congress exempt itself?" I mean, if you have a healthcare plan, it's affected by Obamacare right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:23
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Building on this, sorry for starting a derail, but what's with the talking point that "If Obamacare's so great, why did Congress exempt itself?" I mean, if you have a healthcare plan, it's affected by Obamacare right? They didn't, congress and their staff are the only americans being forced off of their existing plans (by law) and onto the exchanges.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Building on this, sorry for starting a derail, but what's with the talking point that "If Obamacare's so great, why did Congress exempt itself?" I mean, if you have a healthcare plan, it's affected by Obamacare right? Congress did the exact opposite of itself. An amendment adopted makes it so congress specifically has to buy insurance from the exchanges.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:What does "opt out of Obamacare" even mean? It's like nobody told these idiots that it's not UHC. If you aren't already enrolled in an insurance plan you need to do so by 2014 or pay a fine. For me the rate for insurance through an exchange is about $280 a month while the penalty works out to $33 a month. So opting out means you save $250 a month and have the added benefit of no health insurance. Clearly that's the smart move. Speaking of which congress did not exempt itself, its actually the exact opposite. Members of congress and their staffers receive insurance as part of their job, and like everyone else insured through an employer wouldn't need to do anything. However a provision was added to the bill forcing them specifically to get insurance through the exchange. Not only are they not exempt, they are the only group singled out by the law to be enrolled in Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:31
|
|
|
To be clear, the "exemption" the GOP is being disingenuous about has to do with the part of the insurance paid for by the government as an employee benefit. That amendment to the PPACA, for Congress to be on the exchanges, was added by the GOP as a poison pill, but the Dems thought it was a fine idea. So since it wasn't ever meant to be a serious proposal it lacked detail when it came to what that actually means when it comes to Congress, and can be read in such a way that makes it seem like that employee healthcare benefit is going away. The "exemption" the GOP is referring to is for the part of the law that craters that healthcare benefit. Congress has to buy insurance on the exchanges, but they can still pay for part of it with the employee healthcare benefit they receive from the government. Ted Cruz talking about the exemption so much in his very long temper tantrum almost loving broke me. I listened to about 5 hours of it, and I just couldn't believe someone in Congress would straight-up lie like that. I know the idiots in Congress actually lie all the loving time, but usually it's not so brazen. Usually it's some sort of thing where they're calling off-grey white or lying via omission. This was just "up is down" "black is white" contradiction with reality.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 04:52
|
|
|
My frequent debating partner on facebook has left another festering turd of idiotic bigotry on my news feed: I was so tempted to reply with something like, "So, you can only enjoy bacon in the context of your hatred for people of different faiths?".
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
Also, isn't El Niño supposed to be the hot phase of the Pacific ocean's temperature shifts?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 06:56
|
|
|
Wait I'm confused - is he making fun of environmentalists by insinuating that human civilization can continue without the loving ocean or is he parodying conservatives who dismiss environmental disasters or 
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 07:11
|
|
|
Davish Krail posted:Wait I'm confused - is he making fun of environmentalists by insinuating that human civilization can continue without the loving ocean or is he parodying conservatives who dismiss environmental disasters or He didn't realize it was a fake article and is trying to play it off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
Shalebridge Cradle posted:If you aren't already enrolled in an insurance plan you need to do so by 2014 or pay a fine. For me the rate for insurance through an exchange is about $280 a month while the penalty works out to $33 a month. So opting out means you save $250 a month and have the added benefit of no health insurance. Clearly that's the smart move. Honestly, I hate to say it, but it is for me. I cannot afford to buy the lovely, high deductible health insurance my retail job offers. I cannot afford to spend money on routine check ups, I certainly can't afford any serious medical care. Oh, and I make juuuuust enough that I won't be eligible for the medicare expansion. (Poverty line in this country is only $11K a year? WTF?) ACA does good things for a lot of people, I'm just not one of them. I'll probably be dead of a preventable health condition before we get some actual UHC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 07:22
|
|
|
ClothHat posted:He didn't realize it was a fake article and is trying to play it off. No I get that - I'm just trying to figure out the logic of his joke. Like, it doesn't read as genuine self-deprecating panic (like "oh no everything on here is true and the oceans are gone, I'm freaking out!"). Even in realizing that the articles are fake he still manages to come off as the kind of rear end in a top hat who says things like "the Earth is warming? Heh, cool, it's too cold in Minnesota anyway  ". I know he's not actually saying that the oceans aren't necessary for human survival, but the tone of his comment is the same as if he had. It's a telling tendency.e: I guess what I'm trying to point out is that, presented with the embarrassment of not being able to detect an obviously satirical news site, his reaction was neither "Oh man that's embarrassing" nor "Oh jeez can you imagine what it would actually be like if the oceans dried up?": it basically amounted to "yeah sure the news is fake but can you imagine how those goddamn ENVIRONMENTALISTS would react if the oceans dried up? loving losers." Cognac McCarthy fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Sep 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 07:48
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Congress did the exact opposite of itself. An amendment adopted makes it so congress specifically has to buy insurance from the exchanges. Even if they didn't, that wouldn't be "exempting them from obamacare." Exempting someone from Obamacare would be making them ineligible for subsidies, not applying employer mandates, and not fining them or their employers if they go uninsured. THAT would be exemption from Obamacare. Everything I've ever seen framed as "exemption from Obamacare" has been one aspect of it not applying, because the people in question are subject to another provision. VideoTapir fucked around with this message at 12:41 on Sep 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 10:32
|
|
|
After a couple of unexciting weeks, here's a triumphant return to form for LL101: Ironicat.  Voilent Muslims.  uh  Liberal Economics is as effective as Modern Medicine.  Obamacare = Slavery.  Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
How can you tell who is muslim or not?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:How can you tell who is muslim or not? You can't just tell? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
I enjoyed that the old democrats supported slavery and the new ones have a black president. That was well linked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:How can you tell who is muslim or not? When you hold down ALT it displays hitpoints and religious affiliation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
The gently caress is this? Is this guy seriously bashing the hundreds of thousands of deaths medicine prevents a year? I guess we shouldn't be surprised after all the creationist and birther poo poo LL101 has posted, but what? What's the over/under the guy who runs the page believes vaccines are bad? Blarghalt fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Sep 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
Habibi posted:When you hold down ALT it displays hitpoints and religious affiliation. Maybe in the old D2 days, now you have to engage in a dialogue tree to determine if they are true believers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2013 18:02
|
|