Funny events in anti-woke world

[The Rogue Wolf]

As I told a friend earlier today: If P.T. Barnum had ever actually said "there's a sucker born every minute", he'd be crawling out of the grave right now shouting "I TOLD YOU SO".

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

First of all, and not being sarcastic here, thank you for answering my initial question.

Secondly, was it really that hard to say from the beginning that you did not find Beira’s positive aspects to be relevant to the case?
That would have been a quick and simple answer.
As would saying the only apparent interactions Beira had with humans were negative.


Implying that any positive aspects did not exist until JKR thought them up is disingenuous.
Ignoring or not answering the question makes you look like an extremist or someone who just jumped on the bandwagon and started parroting what they heard without thinking.

Plenty of mythological figures have both negative and positive aspects that are at the very least acknowledged.


Just because something may be obvious to you does not mean it is obvious to everyone. Requests for clarification or elaboration should be assumed genuine.

Uhh, cry more, I guess. You were the one trying to gin up positive examples without actually finding anything besides one short snippet. Maybe assume people with different opinions than you are arguing in good faith and from a position of knowledge?

 

[Elijin]

First of all, and not being sarcastic here, thank you for answering my initial question.

Secondly, was it really that hard to say from the beginning that you did not find Beira’s positive aspects to be relevant to the case?
That would have been a quick and simple answer.
As would saying the only apparent interactions Beira had with humans were negative.


Implying that any positive aspects did not exist until JKR thought them up is disingenuous.
Ignoring or not answering the question makes you look like an extremist or someone who just jumped on the bandwagon and started parroting what they heard without thinking.

Plenty of mythological figures have both negative and positive aspects that are at the very least acknowledged.


Just because something may be obvious to you does not mean it is obvious to everyone. Requests for clarification or elaboration should be assumed genuine.

Please stop. You're not some intellectual power house who's asking questions and setting things straight. You currently have multiple threads with abandoned attempts at devil's advocate concern trolling. Find somewhere else to play that game.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Far-right troll and Capitol rioter 'Baked Alaska' tweets that he can't believe he's 'going to jail for an nft salesman' after Trump announces digital trading card series

"Baked Alaska," who livestreamed himself storming the Capitol on January 6, faces a sentence of up to 6 months after pleading guilty to one count.

www.businessinsider.com

This is endless entertainment : D

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Far-right troll and Capitol rioter 'Baked Alaska' tweets that he can't believe he's 'going to jail for an nft salesman' after Trump announces digital trading card series

"Baked Alaska," who livestreamed himself storming the Capitol on January 6, faces a sentence of up to 6 months after pleading guilty to one count.

www.businessinsider.com

This is endless entertainment : D

He should've just stuck with being mad at women on the internet. Weird how most of them believe their own hype

 

[Thaluikhain]

Far-right troll and Capitol rioter 'Baked Alaska' tweets that he can't believe he's 'going to jail for an nft salesman' after Trump announces digital trading card series

"Baked Alaska," who livestreamed himself storming the Capitol on January 6, faces a sentence of up to 6 months after pleading guilty to one count.

www.businessinsider.com

This is endless entertainment : D

For a moment he looked like he might have learnt his lesson and perhaps become a reformed character. But no...

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

You know, I thought it was stupid when transphobes got up in arms over trans people in skateboarding and billiards, but disk golf? Fucking disk golf? Next you're gonna tell me there's a national mini golf authority that needs to make a decision about transgender people on the putt-putt course

 

[Cheetodust]

You know, I thought it was stupid when transphobes got up in arms over trans people in skateboarding and billiards, but disk golf? Fucking disk golf? Next you're gonna tell me there's a national mini golf authority that needs to make a decision about transgender people on the putt-putt course

One of the skateboarders who complained about losing to a trans woman once lost to a pre-teen.

 

[BrawlMan]

One of the skateboarders who complained about losing to a trans woman once lost to a pre-teen.

So he's biatch that would rather blame his failures on the people who beat him fair and square, than rather self-improve. People like that always they're the hottest shit or top dog, and those of not the norm and completely different in some way believe others in that category have no skill. It's always fun seeing asshole like that lose their shit when beaten at their own game, or shown they're not as skilled as they like to believe.

 

[Casual Shinji]

One of the skateboarders who complained about losing to a trans woman once lost to a pre-teen.

Yeah, but 'pre-teen', meaning she wasn't actually a woman yet, so she obviously still had an advantage without any of that estrogen making her all weak and feminine.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Plenty of mythological figures have both negative and positive aspects that are at the very least acknowledged.

Negative and positive in relation to what?

This is part of what I mean about the desire to "reclaim" pre-modern deities being vaguely suspicious. Monotheistic religions tend to position God as the source of all morality and as the final arbiter on good and evil. What God wants is good and what God dislikes is evil. Polytheistic deities typically aren't like this, they aren't really moral beings at all, they're just more powerful than you. Zeus going around forcibly impregnating half of Greece isn't some negative aspect of him to which there is a corresponding positive aspect. He's a God, mortals are his playthings.

The problem with a lot of post-Christian neopaganism is that they want to reclaim these deities but to reclaim them as moral beings or exemplars, which means either actively embracing a code of ethics that valorizes cruelty and the abuse of power or imagining that there must be some secret benevolence underneath it all. Pre-Christian deities fundamentally weren't meant to serve as moral beings or exemplars, they're often just representations of how much the universe sucks, how tiny and insignificant you are within it and how little control you actually have over your life.

 

[Thaluikhain]

You know, I thought it was stupid when transphobes got up in arms over trans people in skateboarding and billiards, but disk golf? Fucking disk golf? Next you're gonna tell me there's a national mini golf authority that needs to make a decision about transgender people on the putt-putt course

Never heard of disk golf, so I half-wonder if this is a PR stunt. There's lots of individuals on the net who get attention by picking stupid fights with others on the net, after all, maybe it applies to sports.

This is part of what I mean about the desire to "reclaim" pre-modern deities being vaguely suspicious. Monotheistic religions tend to position God as the source of all morality and as the final arbiter on good and evil. What God wants is good and what God dislikes is evil. Polytheistic deities typically aren't like this, they aren't really moral beings at all, they're just more powerful than you. Zeus going around forcibly impregnating half of Greece isn't some negative aspect of him to which there is a corresponding positive aspect. He's a God, mortals are his playthings.

Mostly, but even in ancient times people would try to attribute some morality to the Greek deities, and one way of doing that was to ascribe aspects to them which were somehow semi-separate entities. Which they'd also do for other reasons because you can sometimes play fast and loose with the rules of your polytheism and often it's not such a big deal.

 

[Baffle]

they're often just representations of how much the universe sucks, how tiny and insignificant you are within it and how little control you actually have over your life.

But I'm a representation of that already!

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

But I'm a representation of that already!

Well, we can't have just one. No vexation without representation! Or something like that.

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

Think am going to become an accelerationist for Musk's total mental breakdown. He's clearly unable to go backwards on this vulnerable narcissist path of destruction, so ushering that process along as quick as possible is sure to minimise some of the social harms already being done.


-

Libsoftiktok at it again. Fucking evil piece of shit disingenuous kunt.

Katie Porter Did Not Say Pedophilia Isn't a Crime, as Claimed in False Tweet

A context box generated by Twitter said, "This clip has been taken out of context & misrepresents what Rep. Porter is actually saying."

www.snopes.com

Claim:
U.S. Rep Katie Porter, D-Calif., said that pedophilia isn't a crime, but instead is an identity.
Rating:


On Dec. 15, 2022, the Twitter account Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) tweeted a video of U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, D-Calif., speaking during a congressional hearing. The tweet's caption falsely claimed, "Rep Katie Porter (D) says pedophilia isn't a crime -- it's an identity."

For any readers who are unfamiliar with Libs of TikTok, it was described on the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) website as being "a popular anti-LGBTQ+ Twitter account operated by former real estate agent Chaya Raichik." As of this writing, the account had 1.6 million followers.

Here's What Happened
The purpose of the hearing in which Porter was speaking (from a remote location) on Dec. 14 was to listen to survivors of the Club Q gay nightclub mass shooting in Colorado Springs, which had recently occurred, on Nov. 19.

A review of Porter's complete remarks showed that she was talking about how some LGBTQ people had been wrongly branded on social media as "groomers" and "pedophiles."

Porter never said pedophilia wasn't a crime, nor did she claim that being a pedophile was a type of gender identity.

Twitter Corrects the Record
A context box appeared below the false tweet thanks to Twitter's own Community Notes initiative, which read as follows:

Readers added context they thought people might want to know.
This clip has been taken out of context & misrepresents what Rep. Porter is actually saying. Just before this clip, she says that "the groomer narrative is an age-old lie to position LGBTQ+ people as a threat to kids." She's not talking about pedophiles. At 2:49:00 here: c-span.org/video/?524793-1/survivors-club-shooting-activists-testify-anti-lgbtq-violence

Read the Transcript
In the full video from C-SPAN, Porter was speaking with Kelley Robinson, the president of the Human Rights Campaign. We transcribed the relevant portions of the hearing. The first two paragraphs below were not included in the video on Twitter:

Porter: I want to start with Ms. Robinson, if I could. Your organization recently released a report analyzing the 500 most viewed, most influential tweets that identify LGBTQ people as, so-called, "groomers." The "groomer" narrative is an age-old lie to position LGBTQ+ people as a threat to kids, and what it does is deny them access to public spaces, it stokes fear, and can even stoke violence. Ms. Robinson, according to its own hateful content policy, does Twitter allow posts calling LGBTQ people "groomers"?

Robinson: No. I mean, Twitter along with Facebook and many others have community guidelines. It's about holding users accountable to those guidelines, and acknowledging that, when we use phrases and words like "groomers" and "pedophiles" to describe people, individuals in our communities that are mothers, that are fathers, that are teachers, that are doctors, it is dangerous. And it's got one purpose: It is dehumanize us and make us feel like we are not a part of this American society, and it has real-life consequences. So we are calling on social media companies to uphold their community standards, and we're also calling on any American that is seeing this play out to hold ourselves and our community members accountable. We wouldn't accept this in our families. We wouldn't accept this in our schools. There's no reason to accept it online.

Porter: So, I mean, I think you're absolutely right, and it's not, you know, this allegation of "groomer" and "pedophile," it is alleging that a person is criminal somehow and is engaged in criminal acts merely because of their identity, their sexual orientation, their gender identity.

Only Porter's thoughts in the third paragraph above and several remarks afterward were included in the video re-shared by the Libs of TikTok account.

 

[Chimpzy]

Think am going to become an accelerationist for Musk's total mental breakdown. He's clearly unable to go backwards on this vulnerable narcissist path of destruction, so ushering that process along as quick as possible is sure to minimise some of the social harms already being done.

All the free speech warriors no doubt furiously hammering out articles about how Twitter is a private business so the first amendment protection for free speech doesn't apply here, their keyboards spontaneously bursting into flames

 

[Silvanus]

Has it?

Again, there was a point in history (not that long ago really) when neither science or sex existed. The form of the human body was understood to be the result of magical substances and the interior nature of the soul. In other words, men and women were different because they were metaphysically different. Specifically, women were different because their souls were too weak to make them into men, and the exterior sign of this was that they had failed to extrude an external penis.

None of this means that sex "didn't exist"-- just that humans had failed to recognise it or account for it in a very accurate way. Sex predates all extant animal species.

The "discovery" of sex didn't actually change very much about society. Beliefs about the intrinsic nature and capacities of men and women remained exactly the same, they were just magically transcribed into the domain of sex. Suddenly, it wasn't the female soul that was weak but the female nervous system, but the result is essentially the same.

This is absolutely untrue, I'm afraid. Before humanity had well-developed scientific methods, humans tended to come to conclusions based on pattern-recognition. Pattern-recognition led us to those conclusions about the capabilities of male/female animals, and they seemed pretty reliable considering the pattern held in well over 90% of cases.

The discovery of the biological underpinnings of sex gave that pattern context: we found out what biological indicators led to those capabilities/sexual characteristics developing. There was no "magical transcription". We simply recognised the mechanism that explained a pattern we had already broadly found.

My point here is that, from the very beginning, ideas about sex were filtered through a preexisting understanding of how things were supposed to work that not only completely predates any form of science, but was also in many ways fantastically wrong. In fact, the discovery of sex introduced a bunch of new ideas which also turned out to be wrong. It popularized the belief that women were naturally passive and asexual. Women's sexuality, after all, is superfluous to the requirements of sexual reproduction, thus it must be contrary to nature. It completely banished the idea, which so fascinated renaissance anatomists, of the genitals as composed of homologous structures, which of course they are.

Bizarre and tangential ethical/philosophical beliefs can be sparked by scientific discoveries. That does not invalidate the latter. The discovery of evolution prompted eugenics, but that doesn't invalidate the evolutionary theory.

In many ways, the past hundred years has been a long, painful process of removing all the pre-scientific and extraneous baggage from the idea of sex, a process that is still very much ongoing. But once we finish that process, what will be left? Once sex is reduced to the essential physical processes and structures that form its actual basis, will whatever is left be enough to have any social importance?

Well, yes: because if someone wants to have a child, it will be incumbent on them to find someone they can interact with in a functional way so as to make that happen.

Again, my concern would be that once you remove the absoluteness/rigidity or binary nature of sex, what does it even mean?

I'll freely admit that this may be one area in which I am biased, or prone to wishful thinking. I'd be the first to tell you that me wanting to build an identity away from my assigned sex does not actually make the idea of sex meaningless, or mean that it won't continue to have utility to other people. But, even if just on a pedagogical level, I think one of the best ways for people to realize that sex is not absolute/rigid and binary is to face up to how deeply arbitrary it actually is. I think my perspective is a useful one, in that sense, even if it is not capital-T true.

OK, so a question: imagine humankind develops to the point where they have jettisoned the idea of sex altogether, and no longer recognise male and female as categories at all.

A farmer wishes to sell eggs and milk. But his chickens won't lay eggs, and his cows won't produce milk. He tries to get a working population going through breeding, but they can't reproduce.

Or: a recent parent discovers that there's a roughly 50% chance that their child will bleed from the genital area every month, and it may be traumatic if they don't provide support and context. So they introduce the topic. The kid asks how they'll know if they're one of the 50%; parent has to just say they have to wait.

Sure, but I disagree that "sex" in the sense we're using it here is synonymous with sexual characteristics. It is a social (and legal) identity assigned on the basis of (a superficial observation of) sexual characteristics.

Uteruses certainly exist, and you need one in order to get pregnant, but a uterus is not defined by its role in pregnancy. It's a physical object with its own independent existence. If we decide that having a uterus makes you a special type of person called a "woman", then that definition is not actually related to pregnancy, because the uterus does not have the intrinsic purpose of facilitating pregnancy. It's a coincidental relationship in terms of how it relates to the definition of a woman.

I will concede that this same idea could be expressed in terms of correspondence and might even make more sense in those terms, but I don't think that substantially weakens the underlying argument.

Sex (distinct from gender) is a descriptor that refers to those sexual characteristics. "Sexual" means "related to sex"; when you say "sexual characteristics", the term literally means "characteristics to do with sex".

Each individual one of those sexual characteristics does not necessarily have a 100% coincidence rate (in fact, I don't think any of them do). But they have an extremely high relationship, to the point where pretending a category does not exist at all is irrational. Much like describing a dog as a four-legged canid is not literally 100% true all the time, but to therefore pretend the description is completely non-functional is irrational.

You can have a description with caveats/exceptions. That's all there is to it.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Mysterious company behind Trump's $99 trading cards has same address as his West Palm Beach golf club

On Thursday, after teasing a massive announcement the day before, former President Donald Trump unveiled a series of $99 "trading card" nonfungible tokens, or NFTs — images of himself backed by cryptocurrency technology.The announcement was widely mocked — however, one slightly less discussed...

www.rawstory.com

Oh, oh it gets worse.

 

[Dalisclock]

More fun with Trump NFTs.

You paid for a digital nothing and got an actual nothing. As much as I hate NFTs, there's also the person who buys NFTs to blame here as well.

These people deserve each other in the digital hell for the stupid they created together.

Far-right troll and Capitol rioter 'Baked Alaska' tweets that he can't believe he's 'going to jail for an nft salesman' after Trump announces digital trading card series

"Baked Alaska," who livestreamed himself storming the Capitol on January 6, faces a sentence of up to 6 months after pleading guilty to one count.

www.businessinsider.com

This is endless entertainment : D

Maybe he'll reflect on this and consider the poor choices he made in life that brought him to this point.
<Beat>
Yeah, we know that's never gonna happen.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Twitter Spaces Were Taken Offline After Elon Musk Fled One Where He Was Asked About Reporters Being Banned

Musk fled a Space Thursday night after being grilled by reporters. Shortly after that, the Space was cut off, and the entire function was no longer available.

www.buzzfeednews.com

Trump is a popular topic still, right?