|
Guavanaut posted:That just opens the gate to "fine, I'll generate my own society "Alright then, have fun on a deserted island in the middle of goddamned nowhere, we've got our own society and you can't build yours on the back of ours like some parasite."
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 21:45
|
|
"
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
E-Tank posted:Remember, sometimes the red text is there for a reason, LeJackel has this habit of believing that the only way to keep us men The reason for my red text is someone having a surplus of dollars and a paucity of wit. Its pretty misogynist to believe that women are incapable of bearing arms, or that it is improper for them to do so, and in fact out right insulting to imply that its better to "call a big strong man in a uniform to protect you." Its a regressive, paternalist attitude that strips women of their autonomy and independence. If we're to fight misogyny and the oppression of gender roles, we must erode the false notion of women as weak and end the male monopoly on the use of arms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea posted:Now this one, I'm not sure would be convincing, because libertarians argue they're not allowed to disconnect themselves from society the same way they can disconnect their power. Sure they are, just leave the US governments land that it has rented to you in the form of taxes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:The reason for my red text is someone having a surplus of dollars and a paucity of wit. Congratulations, you're buying the talking point the NRA and their ilk is pushing towards women. Violence Policy Center posted:The gun industry's pitch to women is simple: you're a woman; some stranger's going to try and rape you; you'd better buy a handgun. In truth, women are most likely to be victimized by people they know. According to the National Victim Center, 75 percent of all rapes involve offenders known to the victim�including neighbors, friends, husbands, boyfriends, and relatives. Rape in America is a tragedy of youth, with the majority of cases occurring during childhood and adolescence. More than six out of every 10 rapes occur to children and adolescents under the age of 18. According to the Gun Control Act of 1968, persons must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a long gun and 21 years of age to buy a handgun from a licensed dealer. http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/womenfs.htm
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Obviously violence solves every problem, so let's just give everybody guns so they respect each other OR ELSE
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:Congratulations, you're buying the talking point the NRA and their ilk is pushing towards women. You're going to chide me for allegedly 'falling for NRA talking points' with a big screed from the Violence Policy Center? Really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:You're going to chide me for allegedly 'falling for NRA talking points' with a big screed from the Violence Policy Center? Really. And what exactly is wrong with the violence policy center?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
PUGGERNAUT posted:Obviously violence solves every problem, so let's just give everybody guns so they respect each other OR ELSE 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Nyarai posted:Reminds me of this gem from the politoon thread. The Onion has done it better: New Law Legalizes Brandishing Guns At Head Level NRA Calls For Teachers To Keep Loaded Gun Pointed At Class For Entire School Day
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
everyone in this thread is on notice. (fine) edit: https://www.google.com/#q=not+everyone+who+carries+a+gun+is+crazy [quote= http://www.mdjonline.com/StoryDetail.cfm?id=10017128&Section=Home%20Page 3-14-1] In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition. [/quote] anybody left alive there? breadingbutter fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Feb 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:Congratulations, you're buying the talking point the NRA and their ilk is pushing towards women.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:A lot of these points feel like non sequiturs. Acquaintance rape isn't the same thing as date rape, and the fact that the woman knows the perpetrator doesn't mean that a weapon couldn't have been helpful in preventing it. That some victims are too young to own a gun likewise says nothing about how beneficial they may or may not be for those that aren't. And talking about how often women "used a handgun to kill a stranger in self-defense" is deceptive for two reasons - one, because it's limiting the self-defense to defense from strangers, while the reverse victimization is not so limited, and two, because they don't necessarily have to kill their potential assailant to have used a weapon for self-defense. Fair enough, I'll see if I can't find something better. Edit: Well, I found a couple of things that parrot the same article, there's also this: http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Firearms%20and%20Intimate%20Partner%20Violence.pdf But I'm not entirely too sure on if the D&D hivemind will accept it as legitimate. Either way, I could have sworn I'd seen something that pretty much everybody said was true, talking about how gunownership period leads to homicides, and having a gun doesn't really stop anything. Mind I'm not 100% against all guns. While I think our culture relies on them far too much and generally its stupid as all hell to view guns as the manliest of manly things, I will admit I'd like a shiny metal thing that makes a loud noise and shoots down non-living targets. I think more background checks and attempts to ensure that the 'Legal and responsible gun owner' doesn't transition quite so easily to 'unresponsible gun owner' or 'nutjob who shot someone'. Regardless, there's a reason gunchat is frowned upon so I'm going to be quiet now. I throw myself upon the mercy of D&D.  VVV there's that too. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Feb 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:Fair enough, I'll see if I can't find something better. It honestly doesn't even matter what else you find. I don't need more men telling me what I need to do to protect myself. The world is full of men telling us what to do to protect ourselves. Everything just ends up being "but if you had done this", and if you didn't do whatever the this is, then you might have prevented it! I guess you really weren't trying that hard to protect yourself then. I'm not even morally opposed to guns. I've been thinking about getting one, it might be a nice hobby. But I do not need yet another thing on the list of things I'm "supposed" to be doing. edit: While my post was not totally about guns, here's a completely unrelated non-gun thing. I don't have it anymore, but one of my economics text books had one of the email forwards in it. The one where the rich guy is paying for most of the drinks when he goes out with 9 other people, and some of them even get free drinks he has to pay for. I can't remember how the whole thing goes and I really don't want to look for it, but it's about how horrible it is for the rich guy and what would they do without him. I couldn't believe it was actually in a real textbook. Flowers fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Feb 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:And what exactly is wrong with the violence policy center? Well, the gist of your post was "You fell for talking points from [Organization], let me counter with talking points from [Opposing Organization.]" The way you framed thing, we could have reversed positions and made no subjective change. In fact, under your interpretation we could have just posted [Organization Initials].org and been done with it. So its not that you cited the VPC, but claimed I was parroting a biased source and then countered with an equally biased source. That is what was wrong with the post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
CB_Tube_Knight posted:I like how angry people seem to get when you try to simply add diversity to things. See The Last Airbender. Let's take a cartoon show about many nations and make all the good characters white and the bad nation brown skinned! Oh, we need a black guy. Fine, he can be in a flashback and then be shown dead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
I regret contributing to gunchat. Someone post something stupid about the Texas thing. Anyone got a screen cap of Dan Patrick accidentally tweeting "marriage should be between one man and one man"? I'd post it but I'm on my phone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
PUGGERNAUT posted:I regret contributing to gunchat. Someone post something stupid about the Texas thing.  Had it handy since I just reposted it in the general GOP rebuilding thread. It's just so glorious and must be shared.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
edit: beaten to the punch!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:See The Last Airbender. Let's take a cartoon show about many nations and make all the good characters white and the bad nation brown skinned! Oh, we need a black guy. Fine, he can be in a flashback and then be shown dead. Silent Hill was bad about casting, but with gender. The first drafts of the script were rejected by the studio heads over and over again because 'it lacks a male presence.' Finally the writer/director relented and wedged Sean Bean in there as best they could, but the movie suffers for the inclusion. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
  Those poor hard working 1%, working thousands of times harder than other workers. A thousand times more effort, as noted on my mathematically precise Effort Scale.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Is Al Bundy, the character who works 8 hours a day 7 days a week and is paid in Mexican Pesos through a legal loophole probably aimed directly at him being held up as a lazy moocher because he's currently sitting on a couch with his hands folded?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Duke Igthorn posted:Is Al Bundy, the character who works 8 hours a day 7 days a week and is paid in Mexican Pesos through a legal loophole probably aimed directly at him being held up as a lazy moocher because he's currently sitting on a couch with his hands folded? I'm guessing he's the hardworking guy who is looking reproachfully at people who don't give as much effort
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Nice Davis posted:I'm guessing he's the hardworking guy who is looking reproachfully at people who don't give as much effort But he gets paid less than minimum wage despite working 40 odd hours a week for 20 years. Also he endorsed Obama (the actor and the character)
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
We should definitely force millionares to beg and scrape for bread, as the ultra poor door. The rich have it far too easy and need to expend more effort to justify their sick, parasitic existence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
One of these days I just really want to see one of them put their money where their mouth is. Have the CEO of McDonalds and a burger flipper swap jobs for a week, and see who cries that its too hard first.Cowslips Warren posted:See The Last Airbender. Let's take a cartoon show about many nations and make all the good characters white and the bad nation brown skinned! Oh, we need a black guy. Fine, he can be in a flashback and then be shown dead. You are aware that Shyamalan is Indian, right? Its kind of in his name.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:One of these days I just really want to see one of them put their money where their mouth is. Have the CEO of McDonalds and a burger flipper swap jobs for a week, and see who cries that its too hard first. That doesn't make the casting decisions any less racist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You are aware that Shyamalan is Indian, right? Its kind of in his name. Even though South Asians suffer from the effects of colonialism and racism, it's a bit dense to say that they can't be racist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
EXAKT Science posted:Even though South Asians suffer from the effects of colonialism and racism, it's a bit dense to say that they can't be racist. The claim being made is that he is racist against Indians.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The claim being made is that he is racist against Indians. There's nothing stupid about it. You've never heard a middle class black guy talk about niggers? I don't mean the Chris Rock sketch either, it's actually a thing. Hell I remember a study demonstrating that black children in the west implicitly believe white skin is "better", and show a preference for white dolls. It's why the black santa thing was a big deal. Shyamalan being a victim of the culture that causes this doesn't mean he himself isn't propagating it just because it'd be self-defeating.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Hell I remember a study demonstrating that black children in the west implicitly believe white skin is "better", and show a preference for white dolls. If I remember correctly, the phrasing they used was "Point to the pretty doll"
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:There's nothing stupid about it. You've never heard a middle class black guy talk about niggers? I don't mean the Chris Rock sketch either, it's actually a thing. Yeah, I know all about Uncle Ruckus's, but I thought it was a strictly African American thing. I also know of conflict between Latinos and Asians based on nationality divides (Cubans-Americans hating Mexicn-Americans, Chinese-Americans hating Japanese-Americans), but I've never heard of it happening with someone hating their own nationality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:but I thought it was a strictly African American thing. It's actually kind of racist that you thought that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Skin tone discrimination of the 'white = good guys, browner = more evil' has been a thing in Indian culture for a long time too, dating back well into the days of the caste system, and in part used to justify it. British rule probably didn't help with that one either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Skin tone discrimination of the 'white = good guys, browner = more evil' has been a thing in Indian culture for a long time too, dating back well into the days of the caste system, and in part used to justify it. British rule probably didn't help with that one either. It's to the point that 'skin lightening cream' to make you look whiter is actually a thing you can buy in India.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:It's to the point that 'skin lightening cream' to make you look whiter is actually a thing you can buy in India.  I'm going to hope against hope it's not like the old british poo poo that had mercury in it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Breadallelogram posted:It's actually kind of racist that you thought that. Or he could have a basic grasp of US history and be capable of recognizing that the way the African-Americans' ancestors got here and their subsequent treatment was radically different from that of other non-Caucasian peoples.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:Or he could have a basic grasp of US history and be capable of recognizing that the way the African-Americans' ancestors got here and their subsequent treatment was radically different from that of other non-Caucasian peoples. Okay, but that doesn't make it impossible for people of other skin colors to have racist attitudes against their own people. I wasn't seriously accusing Fulchrum of racism, in case that wasn't clear.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:If I remember correctly, the phrasing they used was "Point to the pretty doll" The study in question has been replicated over and over again. In addition to which doll is prettier, they are also asked which one is "good", which one they like the most, which one they'd rather play with, and even which one they'd rather be. The questions change, but the results do not: the white doll is chosen at a far higher rate than the black doll. Hell, some girl even redid the study for her senior class project a couple of years ago. You can look it up on youtube.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Even if M. Night Shyamalan had a history of being good on race issues (which he doesn't, watch Lady in the Water some time*), artistic decisions in movies are beholden to multitudes of producers, investors, executives and, indirectly, the movie-viewing public itself. A director is almost never free to make a film without compromises. *do not watch Lady in the Water MisterBadIdea fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Feb 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
MisterBadIdea posted:Even if M. Night Shyamalan had a history of being good on race issues (which he doesn't, watch Lady in the Water some time*), artistic decisions in movies are beholden to multitudes of producers, investors, executives and, indirectly, the movie-viewing public itself. A director is almost never free to make a film without compromises.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 05:26
|
|