|
TinTower posted:You know, as opposed to the literal fascism that the Catholic Church supported in Italy in the 1930s. Also in Germany, Spain and Croatia, and anywhere else they could in all likelihood. One cannot overstate exactly how frightened the Catholic Church was of losing power and influence, and arguably they still are. They were willing to do heinous things to support any government they thought would be favourable to the Church -- knowing this, I think it's little coincidence that fascist dictators really sought to work with the Catholic Church in countries where it was a powerful force. If the midwest US were Catholic, Donald Trump would be the Most Tremendous friend to the Catholic church, I tell you, you've never seen a better friend to the Church than Donald Trump would be.
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Is there any country where Catholic clergy weren't loving children? It's disturbingly common -- both the raping and the subsequent coverups that always occurred.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
computer parts posted:State College, PA. ...well played. Honestly it's just depressing how eager people are to ignore kidfucking if there's any reason at all for them to do so.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 07:34
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:Probably way longer. I can imagine this is just the way they always handled it. Apparently child sexual abuse is also a huge issue within various Hasidic Jewish communities, and they are just as keen to cover them up. It's really disgusting to think about how many people are pedophiles who just don't feel "safe enough" to commit an unspeakable crime.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:"All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves. .... Transsexuals merely cut off the most obvious means of invading women, so that they seem non-invasive." I can understand the processes that lead to TERFs existing, but Jesus are they ever loving awful. I think it's a combination of self-hatred and spite. If you are a woman, and you enjoy being a woman, surely you would understand what drives other people to also feel like a woman and to prefer being a woman, unless of course you derive your feeling of gender identity exclusively from your gentalia, which seems bizarre and sad to say the least. And if you feel spiteful because your girlfriend realized his gender identity was not female, that's even worse and unbelievably petty. Edit: which is not to say the relationship should continue. If you don't feel sexually attracted to your partner as they transition, that's an issue of your sexual orientation and is no one's fault. PT6A fucked around with this message at 16:48 on May 22, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
If there is such a thing as divine punishment, I'm pretty sure that people who torture and abuse kids (under any pretence, or none at all) will indeed enjoy priority admittance to it 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
With the flames of homophobia and transphobia being fanned ever more in some parts of the US, it was sadly only a matter of time before something like this happened. I hope all the assholes who were wringing their hands about trans people in washrooms and similar things realize they have blood on their hands after this incident.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:Luckily for them, in this case they can blame Islam instead. Some other people care more about the feelings and rights of guns I think I'll blame both, and the easy availability of guns in the US too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:I know I'm probably just kneejerking, but... I'm not the only one who wants loving vengeance for this poo poo, right? You're not, but in the end, what are you going to do? Bomb some civilians, launch a pogrom against Muslims who had nothing to do with this? That's no good. I hope we find Al-Baghdadi or whoever's leading ISIS and pull his fingernails out with pliers just because, but it's not like we weren't looking for him in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:The Republican rush to embrace The Gays because it gives them an excuse to be islamophobes reminds me of that line of world leaders marching for Charlie Hebdo. And much like that, they will be abandoned with shocking speed as soon as they do something which disagrees with whatever things they hold dear.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:They hate us for our freedoms. Well, this attack proves this, at its core. The primary freedom under attack is the freedom to have a sexual relationship with whomever you choose in this case, and we need to not lose sight of that (nor the fact that homophobia in the US was very likely a motivating factor), but ultimately this was an attack on a right which we should hold sacred in a secular society, and it should be treated as such. When one such right comes under attack, we must treat it as if every freedom we have which they oppose is under attack. We shouldn't divide the results into categories when the causes are the same. Of course, we should also take this opportunity to confront and eradicate homophobia in our own society.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
I can see OwlFancier's point (let's call it the "abundance of caution" position) but I think it's fairly unreasonable to prohibit gay men who are not having unsafe sex from donating blood. Having unsafe sex with a new partner within a certain time period should be disqualifying no matter which genders are involved, and there is no special risk posed by gay men's blood if they are not engaging in unsafe sexual practices. I don't like seeing it frames as a rights issue, because as OwlFancier points out, blood donation is not for the benefit of the donor. Likewise, prohibiting people who've received tattoos recently, or who have engaged in sex work, or taken intravenous drugs, is not denying those people rights or making a moral judgement about their behaviour. It's better to frame it as a common sense issue: no additional risk is posed by gay men donating blood, any more than other people who've engaged in unsafe sex, so why are we disqualifying a huge pool of potential donors?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Wooten posted:It sucks that you are reminded that society views you as filth every time you encounter a blood drive, but UGH EFFORT! You could say the same about people who've received a tattoo or accepted money for sex. It's not supposed to be a moral judgement. In the case of banning gay men from blood donation, it's nonsense, but I don't think it's a moral judgement.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Wooten posted:Exactly, but a moral judgement is all it is when there is not a statistical or scientific reason for it. The "abundance of caution" argument is a stupid one, but it's not a moral judgement. There was a valid reason for the restriction before people knew what HIV was and how to test for it, and the fact that the ban remains has more to do with institutional inertia than ongoing moral criticism. It's a stupid prohibition, but it exists for reasons other than homophobic prejudice. PT6A fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Jun 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:in this context it absolutely is unless Owl also wants black people to not give blood. Black people weren't barred from donating blood in the first place though. I'm not saying the prohibition is good at this point. It's stupid, it serves no purpose, and it discriminates for no reason. However, at the time the prohibition was introduced it made sense to do it because we didn't have the testing capability we do now, and we knew much less about what HIV/AIDS was. Clawing back that prohibition is needlessly difficult because it involves a lot of bureaucracy, and they are afraid of the liability that could presumably occur if even one HIV infection is traced back to a gay man giving blood. Again: the prohibition should not exist, and if it were to be introduced today, it would be a moral judgement. I'm just saying the fact that it continues to exist is due to other stupid factors. I will grant you that anyone who's actively arguing in favour of keeping the ban is probably making a moral judgement.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Is "Latinx" really a thing? Just say "Latin@" if you want to cover both possible endings.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
EXAKT Science posted:"Latin@" excludes non-binary identities. I suppose it does. How would a non-binary Latin person be referred to in spoken conversation? Is there an ending, apart from o/a that would be used in that case?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Probably exactly as you just did, Latin person, or like, 'from (wherever they're actually from)' or something. I've heard people say 'latin-ex' out loud and it sounds fine but I have no clue if that's a 'thing' or just something they do. Makes sense. I meant how would they be referred to and/or refer to themselves in Spanish more than in English, since there's no non-gendered way of saying Latin in Spanish.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Didn't they do similar examinations during the satanic ritual abuse panic, which were found to be completely inaccurate?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
Weren't there already earlier precedents for such from other countries deriving from English common law, such as in the UK itself, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and probably any number of places I'm forgetting? I don't think the lack of precedent is really the stumbling block for the remaining countries that have their head stuck in the sand. Good on them though in any case, it's certainly going to be important to the queer community in Belize if nothing else, and every victory counts.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Sign me up for Cyber Feudalism Yeah, if that's cyber feudalism I'm totally on board. You'd think WikiLeaks, of all people, would be aware that private organizations have no duty to respect free speech whatsoever, and that's not even addressing for the moment that what happened to Leslie Jones is probably criminal harassment anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
iospace posted:The biggest thing that stands out is the 18-29 age breakdown. How the gently caress do you get 61% of that group saying LGBTQ are cool and only 39% saying HB2 is trash? Because unless you're paying attention and thinking critically about things, you may not know or you may have been lied to about what HB2 actually does, and why it's bad.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:To be perfectly honest, I think most of the time when a leftist group has this issue they basically work backwards. They're mainly using theory to cover for their own prejudices. Red Butterfly was formed shortly after stonewall and so its members took their own cultural baggage into it. It's like the "class based" analysis that anti Gay leftists use. If you actually read what they say it's mostly just a moral objection cloaked in the usual jargon. Any ideologue will instinctively twist their ideology to support whatever they already believe. The ideology cannot have flaws; ergo if they are perfectly followers of the ideology (which, of course, they believe they are), anything they like is supported by the ideology, and anything they dislike is anathema to the ideology.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
iospace posted:Or, in other words, "Conservatism can't fail, it can only be failed"? In essence, yes, but it's important to recognize that any ideology is susceptible to that line of thinking. Just look at religion, for example: it's stunning, really, that the inerrant word of an omnipotent being so often lines up more or less exactly with what a believer already believes.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:I hope Pence chokes to death on the fattest, gayest dick available. I would hope no gay man would befoul their penis by putting it someplace as disgusting as Mike Pence's mouth, or any part of Mike Pence actually.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:Isn't there some internet law about straight white guys can do anything and no one cares, but if a minority does something then they represent every single member of their group. That's pretty much covered in male/white/straight/etc. privilege.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:Unless you live in a cabin in the woods where you'll also encounter large hostile wildlife it's still a bad idea though. Or near a school! Those pesky classroom grizzlies are a menace, from what I hear.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
I'm scared of the people who are most loudly concerned about trans people in bathrooms and locker rooms. Normal people use public bathrooms to piss and poo poo, and perhaps (in airports or something) wash your face, brush your teeth, or shave. Only someone who themselves aspires to be a sexual predator would think peeping/sexual assault is something normal people would try in bathrooms if they had the opportunity.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
Glazier posted:It officially repeals HB2 which they hope will appease business enough to return. Do they suppose businesses are run by people even dumber than they are?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
cis autodrag posted:tankies are the loving worst. "i will ignore all the crimes of not-communist dictatorships lest people use <<hey russia>> as an argument against communism. also i poo poo my pants and do not buy new ones because clean pants are an effete distraction of the bourgeoisie." There's also a strong undercurrent of nationalism in Eastern Europe: Admitting to your country having done something wrong would be tantamount to saying that, possibly, your heritage is not the most superior one in the world (which is constantly and unfairly put upon by pernicious external influences, which one must constantly be on guard against) and, well, that would just be intolerable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
cis autodrag posted:Tankies are Western commies though. Aging American and British trots who defend everything China, Russia, or Korea do lest it besmirch the superiority of communism. Right, I was talking specifically about the person BigRed was quoting, who was of Russian descent.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
cis autodrag posted:Gotcha. My brain shut down on that post before I saw who the quote came from. No problem. For what it's worth, I've also dealt with tankies from communist countries (or I suppose you could term them "true believers" if you prefer) -- I had a Cuban friend who had studied in the USSR, and even though he lived in Canada for quite a time he was still a very big fan of communism, Stalinism and everything else. He eventually left to work in Venezuela, presumably on Chavez's socialist paradise. I have no idea what he's doing now (I haven't heard from him since Chavez died). Funny story: apparently if you were trying to reach him in Cuba, because three people named Ivan used his phone line, you were to ask for "Crazy Ivan" to reach him. He came by that nickname honestly...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Mississippi may itself be unconstitutional, it is so awful a place that one could argue there mere fact of existing within it deprives a person of the pursuit of happiness.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Not to mention that fabricating a certain type of specialized tissue in a laboratory, as might be useful in genital surgery, is always going to be easier than fabricating a whole, functional organ. It's not like they just print a whole new dong and sew it on.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2017 22:05
|
|