|
I remember running a bit late getting to a baseball game and I was still making my way across the parking lot when the anthem started playing, and people were giving me the dirtiest looks that I just kept heading for the gate rather than stop where I was for flag worship time. The brain worms are such that literally not standing in unison for a special song is seen as this horrible faux pas at best, active treason at worst.
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
I haven't stood for the anthem since shortly after 9/11 and I have received lots of poo poo for it, especially when I was still in school. People's brains just break around the subject.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
It makes me wonder what people would say, if me, a Brtt, goes to a baseball game or whatever and I don't stand for the national anthem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Tsietisin posted:It makes me wonder what people would say, if me, a Brtt, goes to a baseball game or whatever and I don't stand for the national anthem. As a Brit who has done this and made the mistake of remarking upon how weird it felt in real time, not great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
I grew up outside the US and it was required that the anthem be played before basically any public performance - it was actually played in cinemas before the movies, for instance. Everyone also had to stand, but there was a sort of universal sigh-and-eyeroll situation where it was just something that we were taking care of, but no one really cared about - a lot like the also-required photographs of the president that hung in every store and business. It was super weird to go from that to the US, where none of this was ostensibly required but there was so much more social and cultural fervor about doing it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 21:58
|
|
|
I remember visiting family in Montana and reading in the paper about a man who knocked out a 13-year-old boy, fracturing his skull, for "disrespecting the national anthem." A few days later, my relatives took me to a rodeo, and I made sure to respect the poo poo out of the anthem. That's American freedom, baby!
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
At another baseball game I went to, I was early and at my seat for flag worship time, but elected to remain seated. Had a guy attempt to dump his beer on me. People really can't just mind their own business
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
"God drat, just stand up, take of yer hat and salute the flag! Is that so hard?" "What? Whaddaya mean I should wear a mask during a pandemic? It's a FREE COUNTRY!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 23:44
|
|
|
You can’t tell me what to do! Government can’t tell me what to do! Hey quit being gay! Hey quit complaining about systemic racism in the bestest country in the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Tim Tebow is another example of regessive virtual signaling BS. also alot of black athletes have prayer rings before a game starts yet you never hear about those until some white guy that was willing to be a good media tool for regressive media came up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 00:03
|
|
|
“Virtue signaling” was never meant to be a criticism of the Democratic Party’s lip service to progress while failing to actually do anything, it was a way to dismiss all left-of-Pinochet politics outright. They don’t differentiate between Marvel creating a racially diverse cast for the Northrop Grumman comic they made and efforts by activists to get Medicare for All passed. Corporate pandering is the same as Marxism. The “Orange man bad” thing also makes no effort to distinguish Never Trumpers who just hate that he’s crude, and leftists who have real policies they’d like to be in place rather than his. And as has been said, the accusation of virtue signaling was never mean to be a criticism of what someone does or doesn’t do, it never comes up in regards to public displays of patriotism, religion, cop and troop worship, being a big tough manly man who eats steak and drinks whisky, posing with guns , LARPing about fighting satanic child trafficking, etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 04:45
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:“Virtue signaling” was never meant to be a criticism of the Democratic Party’s lip service to progress while failing to actually do anything, it was a way to dismiss all left-of-Pinochet politics outright. They don’t differentiate between Marvel creating a racially diverse cast for the Northrop Grumman comic they made and efforts by activists to get Medicare for All passed. Corporate pandering is the same as Marxism. ... pretending to be a righteous leader of a religious university while also going on drunken yacht trips with young women dressed in ways that would get them ejected from said university or having them stand on the barbell while doing pelvic thrusts...
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
Relative straight up posting links to Parler on Facebook these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
I wonder how Sam Elliot feels about that meme?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 17:59
|
|
|
I think it's been brought up before that he's not nearly the megachud that memes make him out to be. Conservatives are just so loving simple in the head that they picked a photo of a guy who "looks conservative" and is making a smug look about something and that was good enough. See: conservatives consistently liking/using music that is antithetical to their beliefs
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
I'd say a good third of memes I see from that relative involve cowboys in some way. A lot of the 1993 film Tombstone, for whatever reason. (Which also featured Sam Elliott.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 18:38
|
|
|
.....Plans to block out the Sun? Can they not tell the difference between a real person and C. Montgomery Burns?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
Grimdude posted:I think it's been brought up before that he's not nearly the megachud that memes make him out to be. Conservatives are just so loving simple in the head that they picked a photo of a guy who "looks conservative" and is making a smug look about something and that was good enough. BOOORRRRNNNN in the USA! I was BOOORRRRNNNN in the USA, now!
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 18:59
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:.....Plans to block out the Sun? Can they not tell the difference between a real person and C. Montgomery Burns? I mean SCoPEx is a real thing that is happening. But try explaining it to someone who believes Bill Gates is trying to wipe out the earth's population. https://www.wbur.org/earthwhile/2020/07/22/harvard-solar-geoengineering-climate-change
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:I wonder how Sam Elliot feels about that meme? I don’t think I’ve actually seen the whole movie at once, but I’m pretty sure the character turns to the camera and preaches being the exact opposite of the kind of person who goes around calling people “a special kind of stupid.”
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:I don’t think I’ve actually seen the whole movie at once, but I’m pretty sure the character turns to the camera and preaches being the exact opposite of the kind of person who goes around calling people “a special kind of stupid.” Yes, his character is a nebulous "cowboy" who is supposedly narrating the story to the viewer. He does typical conservative things like ask The Dude not to cuss so much, drink sarsaparilla, and uh, be nice to people. I have no idea what Sam Elliot's politics are but that fact alone means hes probably not a full blown chud, though as an older white guy im sure hes problematic but who fuckin cares. WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Sep 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
There’s a lot to not like about Bill Gates, no need to believe conspiracy theories about him. Dumb motherfuckers can’t even hate right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
Bobulus posted:Relative straight up posting links to Parler on Facebook these days. I like that the author apparently ranks "Supporting a feminist artist" as even worse than "Blotting out the Sun" and "Injecting children with poison." (Then again they are black children being affected so that probably influenced his ranking.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
Bobulus posted:I'd say a good third of memes I see from that relative involve cowboys in some way. A lot of the 1993 film Tombstone, for whatever reason. (Which also featured Sam Elliott.) Fun thing about Tombstone, and the whole OK Corral shootout in the real world, is that it was a story about a band of Eastern businessmen trying to force their refined urban ways on the local frontier types, including by enforcing gun control laws against some country outlaws. So of course the right ends up romanticizing both the Earps and the Cowboys in ways that don't really make sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
My spouse's caregiver is a friend on both of our Facebook accounts because we have a good relationship with her and she likes that we share some of our political views with her. We got her to register to vote. But she shares the occasional Save the Children/"California legalized pedophilia" post that's Qanon-flavored. What is a good way to explain the truths and lies about this? I pay no attention to that conspiracy outside of what gets talked about in this thread and as a result have no idea where to begin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 02:58
|
|
|
Lord Zedd-Repulsa posted:Qanon-flavored. What is a good way to explain the truths and lies about this? I pay no attention to that conspiracy outside of what gets talked about in this thread and as a result have no idea where to begin. https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/08/21/qanon-2020-election/ If she's open to reading articles instead of just video or social media comments, there are a ton more. Edit: pretty much lovely Nostradamus, but exclusively propaganda about how political opponents of Republicans are all unbelievably evil. There's a reason it's got to be pedos, because any hedging that someone does in explaining the falsehoods is hard to accept because it'll sound like apologetics for some aspect of the conspiracy. Everyone hates child molesters, it's the easiest bandwagon to appropriate and all it takes is one or two confirmed pedos in power to reinforce their bullshit. It's also a classic Nazi move, FYI. Like Dennis Hastert, the GOP equivalent to Nancy Pelosi during the whole drat W Bush presidency. On top of being a lovely right wing grifter and authoritarian, he's a literal child molester. Convicted and everything. Funny how Q bullshit waited until a republican president with dozens of sexual harassment complaints was elected without the popular vote. Funny how the bad guys in Q world are at least 80% comprised of Democrats or at least not-Republicans. Q is like opt-in schizophrenia. I think the best way to dissuade someone is the preemptive info-dump, because you'd have to be either crazy or an idiot to think that somehow there's enough overlap between murderers, child molesters, human traffickers, cannibals, Satanists and other villain groups to actually make up a power clique that runs the Democratic party. It's like a lovely rant from an unmedicated homeless loon on the bus, except sourced from the internet's racist butthole forum. sweart gliwere fucked around with this message at 14:01 on Sep 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 13:43
|
|
|
Lord Zedd-Repulsa posted:My spouse's caregiver is a friend on both of our Facebook accounts because we have a good relationship with her and she likes that we share some of our political views with her. We got her to register to vote. But she shares the occasional Save the Children/"California legalized pedophilia" post that's Qanon-flavored. What is a good way to explain the truths and lies about this? I pay no attention to that conspiracy outside of what gets talked about in this thread and as a result have no idea where to begin. Are there other people within your circle that share your political beliefs but are also woke to how outlandish and dangerous QAnon is? I've found it effective in the past to get others involved in things like this. Be respectful but if you can get a couple of others involved with simple "Please don't tell me you're falling for that bullshit. You're better than this!" type comments you can snap them back pretty easily if they're not already neck deep.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
would pointing out the vast majority of sex crimes are committed by people familiar with the victim help? (pedo ) stranger danger is BS, and a family member, educational figure, or some other close authority figure is more likely to be the criminal than some triangle org secret agent cabal that's doing a real life version of Taken.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
Lord Zedd-Repulsa posted:My spouse's caregiver is a friend on both of our Facebook accounts because we have a good relationship with her and she likes that we share some of our political views with her. We got her to register to vote. But she shares the occasional Save the Children/"California legalized pedophilia" post that's Qanon-flavored. What is a good way to explain the truths and lies about this? I pay no attention to that conspiracy outside of what gets talked about in this thread and as a result have no idea where to begin. As far as the specific "California legalized pedophilia!" scare story that's going around Qanon and Evangelical circles (wow there's a lot of overlap there who would have thought), it should be pretty simple to explain to someone with non-poo poo political views. I've explained it to my mom, who was also fairly concerned, and she got it pretty quick. It's just a matter of countering all of the distortion that fundamentalists have done to what the bill actually does. I'd start by stressing that this bill hasn't "legalized" anything. The crime that this bill addresses, statutory rape, remains a crime in California. All that this bill does is give the judge in the case discretion as to whether or not the older party involved should be put on the sex offender registry for it, assuming that there is not a large age gap between the two. The judge is still perfectly capable of saying "yes, this person should be on the sex offender registry" depending on the situation, but previously, it was automatically done no matter the circumstances. I think that most rational people would agree that statutory rape is a bad thing, but that the rest of a person's life shouldn't be ruined if they get caught having consensual sex with their 17-year-old significant other a few days after their 18th birthday. Another thing to stress is that this is already the law in California, but specifically for straight people (it only counts for vaginal intercourse). The bill being passed now just extends that coverage to homosexual couples by extending what specific kinds of sex it covers. It's making sure that the law covers everyone equally. Evangelical pundits have distorted this bill and left out a lot of the background context. Really, it's like candy to them, since they can twist it around to make it seem like everything they've been saying about The Gay Agenda is finally coming true. "They say it's to end discrimination? AGAINST GAY PEDOPHILES?!" And then Qanon takes it from there. As for the rest of the "Save the children" stuff, if it seems to be coming from a good place - as in from an actual concern for the welfare of children and not using them as idealized victims of Satanic Dragon Hillary Clinton - I think the best thing to do would be to encourage the good parts of it (link her to ACTUAL child welfare organizations), but emphasize that the people behind poo poo like #savethechildren are bugfuck nuts and are just using it to have mass appeal, since nobody likes pedophiles. How you do that is up to you and how well you know this person.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:would pointing out the vast majority of sex crimes are committed by people familiar with the victim help? Well unfortunately the problem there has been two fold. First, this is an emotionally charged issue. People don't much care for the rationality of it and will likely dismiss it regardless of statistics. Second, pointing out authority figures are more at risk of abducting kids lead a lot of teachers, family members etc. Getting the finger pointed at them instead. People dont want their rage reduced they want to direct it toward something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
sweart gliwere posted:https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/08/21/qanon-2020-election/ Sometimes, when I bother and/or run into it, I'll ask if "if this were in a movie, a TV show or a book (and I'll mix in soap opera or "reality" show) would it seem a little over the top? But usually I just scoff, write them off, ignore them, block, unfriend and call them morons because I just can't anymore with this. I wonder what would happen if you actually started texting and PM'ing them, pretending to be a part of it and deep undercover wiht like a direct line to Q or something? Dug in deep, scared, full of information, "they're watching me" and having seen things no one would believe before you bounced out with "psyche! Just fuckin with ya! It's all bulllshit. Can't believe you feel for this stupidity" I just lost my job and I swear I gotta figure out a way to get on this RW grift. A deep undercover run that gets exposed might be fun actually.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 23:32
|
|
|
There’s a old joke that the best thing to do to a conspiracy theorist is to try and out-crazy them. Like if someone believes the moon landing was a hoax, laugh at them for believing the moon is real. The problem with Qanon is that I don’t know how you can get any crazier than that. The rabbit hole never ends.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2020 23:48
|
|
|
letthereberock posted:There’s a old joke that the best thing to do to a conspiracy theorist is to try and out-crazy them. Like if someone believes the moon landing was a hoax, laugh at them for believing the moon is real. The difficulty is that if you are inclined to believe one conspiracy theory, you're inclined to believe all of them regardless of how mutually contradictory they might be. They'll believe the moon landing was faked, that the moon is fake, and that alien pedophiles have been living on the moon and astronauts landing there was part of secret negotiations by the Illuminati simultaneously
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
I want to very subtly but very clearly seed the idea that the Q thing is controlled opposition for something bigger I won't describe, and indicate that I'm part of that bigger thing... And then act as though I've said too much, and start vigorously reaffirming all the Q stuff again
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Sometimes, when I bother and/or run into it, I'll ask if "if this were in a movie, a TV show or a book (and I'll mix in soap opera or "reality" show) would it seem a little over the top? Like when I was reading some fluffy synopsis of saint Patrick's story. It claimed he resurrected not only dozens of dead folk, but that some of those had been dead and buried for years. Combined with all the other miracles attributed to him, he's clearly a better candidate for Messiah than actual bible Jesus, probably by an order of magnitude. Either scriptural Jesus was actually unbelievably lazy with his divine powers, or St Patty found a much better source of mojo. Two classic fan-fiction mistakes: making the new character ridiculously overpowered or utterly one-dimensional. Despite doing both of those for their story's villains, and never making clear or accurate predictions, Q fanfiction will continue to inspire delusional political extremists for years to come.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 01:04
|
|
|
I’ve been tempted to start fake memes that subtly make fun of the people who actually believe the poo poo they read in memes. Except that would take a lot of effort for something stupid and that’s the real problem, dumb people have plenty of time to not think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 01:16
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:The difficulty is that if you are inclined to believe one conspiracy theory, you're inclined to believe all of them regardless of how mutually contradictory they might be. My understanding is theres a tacit acceptance that something is wrong so they start believing multiple theories because hey, ones gonna be right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
Bobulus posted:Relative straight up posting links to Parler on Facebook these days. Speaking of loving with conspiracy nuts. This one is fun because you can ask the people who post this what operating system they're using. 90-ish percent chance they're on Windows. So ask them who first developed Windows and if their computer has a camera. tek79 fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Sep 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 04:20
|
|
|
tek79 posted:Speaking of loving with conspiracy nuts. This one is fun because you can ask the people who post this what operating system they're using. 90-ish percent chance they're on Windows. So ask them who first developed Windows and if their computer has a camera. These are the same people who think that posting "I do not consent to Facebook using my content..." is legally binding. They would find the necessary mental flexibility to handwave away the point you're trying to make.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 07:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
PhazonLink posted:would pointing out the vast majority of sex crimes are committed by people familiar with the victim help? I don't recall this person's name but there was an academic from my local university that got a bit of attention internationally for being outspoken on the topic of public perception of victimisation of minors in sports/community organisations vs the data. The gist of it from what I remember is that a minor is much more likely to be victimised by an underage peer or an adult who is not attracted to children specifically but is acting opportunistically. But to be realistic, the people that go deep on the these kind of conspiracies are not the sort of people swayed by peer reviewed social science articles. Criminology especially, a lot of people will dismiss that entirely because they believe it to exist to find ways of excusing criminals or twisting things to make them the victims.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2020 15:47
|
|