So yesterday I quoted some random Spearheader who described women (well, white women in particular) as “complete parasitical whores roaming the landscape spreading VD like Johnny Appleseed and fucking men over.”
One reader wondered if Mr. Appleseed really went about spreading VD. So I did a little research, and it turns out that it is exceedingly unlikely that Mr. Appleseed – who actually was a real person — spread anything other than the magic of apples. And his Swedenborgian beliefs.
Why? Because Mr. Appleseed – real name John Chapman – was what these days we might call a Man Going His Own Way. Seems he didn’t have much truck with the ladies, according to one contemporary account quoted in his Wikipedia entry:
On one occasion Miss PRICE’s mother asked Johnny if he would not be a happier man, if he were settled in a home of his own, and had a family to love him. He opened his eyes very wide–they were remarkably keen, penetrating grey eyes, almost black–and replied that all women were not what they professed to be; that some of them were deceivers; and a man might not marry the amiable woman that he thought he was getting, after all.
So what led poor Mr. Appleseed to these dire thoughts about women? Apparently the underage girl he hoped to some day get with was more into dudes who weren’t him:
Now we had always heard that Johnny had loved once upon a time, and that his lady love had proven false to him. Then he said one time he saw a poor, friendless little girl, who had no one to care for her, and sent her to school, and meant to bring her up to suit himself, and when she was old enough he intended to marry her. He clothed her and watched over her; but when she was fifteen years old, he called to see her once unexpectedly, and found her sitting beside a young man, with her hand in his, listening to his silly twaddle.
That ungrateful little strumpet!
I peeped over at Johnny while he was telling this, and, young as I was, I saw his eyes grow dark as violets, and the pupils enlarge, and his voice rise up in denunciation, while his nostrils dilated and his thin lips worked with emotion. How angry he grew! He thought the girl was basely ungrateful. After that time she was no protegé of his.
But Appleseed, despite giving up on women in the real world, held out hope for the afterlife – explaining to others that he expected to have two spirit wives all his own after he died. Which I guess is the 19th century equivalent of the MGTOWers today who fantasize about the sexy robot ladies who will eventually, it is hoped, make actual human females – with their troubling “thoughts” and “needs” and “desires” of their own – obsolete.
Mr. Appleseed’s quest to remain alone was probably also helped by the fact that – if the illustration I found on Wikipedia is any indication – he looked a bit like Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Only much, much sloppier, with long hair. Oh, and instead of wearing a baseball cap, he wore “a tin utensil which answered both as a cap and a mush pot.”
So, yeah, a creepy weirdo who hates women — definitely an MGTOWer all the way.
Oh, except that he actually did something with his life — you know, helping spread apple trees to a big portion of the midwest — instead of spending all his time going on about how all women are whores.
* The South seceded from the U.S. because it wanted to protect the institution of slavery.
Oh, why oh why do I think Meller has a huge can of worms ready to open on that front?…
Penn and Teller on 9/11
Jeez, that video — why the obsession with remote controlled planes, though? Why do they think the eeeeevil government didn’t just have real planes used? It’s like a weird extra nonsense detail.
why the obsession with remote controlled planes, though? Why do they think the eeeeevil government didn’t just have real planes used? It’s like a weird extra nonsense detail.
Conspiracy theories tend to have those in spades…
Conspiracy theories tend to have those in spades…
I think it adds to the depersonalization effect – the faceless, mechanical shadow government behind the attacks, too.
That kind of makes sense… and considering the entire thing is like a paranoid fanfic, maybe it’s just extra detail supplied as part of their fucked up fantasy world-building. Like, it’s so fun to make up this crap that they don’t want to be conservative about it and keep tacking on new ideas. Ick ick. 🙁
Oh boy. He’s onto the conspiracies now eh? What is it with MRAs (not all of them but most) and the conspiracy theories? I thought men were all about logic, empirical evidence and cold hard facts! not pussy “theories” about what you FEEL is really going on.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xog5FoODC4s&w=420&h=315%5D
I’m imagining that’s what Meller sounds like.
For the record, I enjoy a good conspiracy as much as anyone. I’m sure there is lots of stuff the government is hiding from us. And I think people have the right to know. I’m not gonna pretend I know exactly what is being hidden from us though, especially if I have no evidence to prove it.
*goes off to read zhinxy’s links*
.” Like, it’s so fun to make up this crap that they don’t want to be conservative about it and keep tacking on new ideas. Ick ick. ”
Bingo. And I think, having been a conspiracy follower forever, there’s certain subconcsious things that keep repeating, much as in urban legends, (There’s a lot of thinking and a paper I wanna right on this. Heh.) And there is also a tendency by some conspiracists to differentiate – Add little details so they don’t blend in with the others screaming about the illuminati. They add their personal touches. And it’s true (Look at our adventures in trying to kill Castro!) that the real shadow operations of the Gov are so damn weird sometimes it’s hard to tell where conspiracy theory begins. But if you’ve got a general theme shared by a few big names, and they’ve all added their “copyright touches” and bent it to their mega theory, you’ve got something like the 9/11 truth movement,.
Though if it was indeed, ick, or icke, I should say, there would be alien lizard rulers of earth involved… 😉
http://www.davidicke.com/
OMG ALEX JONES!!!! Ty Quackers. Especially for clicking on my links. I feel listened to! 😉
zhinxy,
of course! I like learning new things, particularly about politics.
What do you think of Noam Chomsky? I’m still not too familiar with his work but what he’s saying makes sense here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el1CdxiDo6M&feature=related
I’m completely for privately owned businesses, as long as people aren’t getting screwed out of money and healthcare and people aren’t being discriminated against. And we just need to find a way to establish a system where there isn’t such a large gap between the rich and the poor.
Meller:
1) The disputants, or their sponsors, would NOT hold, or be responsible in any way for sureties, bonds, or any other commitment for good behavior! The sureties (for subscribers, customers, et al) would be held by the CR (Conflict Resolution)/Adjudication firms themselves, who would be responsible for disbursement after the conflict(s) in question had been resolved. the “guilty” client would then be responsible for repaying his debt, NOT to his victims, for that was already taken care of , but to his CR/Adjudicator who advanced the money for the judgement against him.
What if the person the disputant is pissed off at refuses to take part, say someone who is upset with you refusing to allow his sister to leave your possession, comes to the Firm of Rutee, Pecunium, and Ami, to plead their case?
What if you, in your, “no ‘blacks’ allowed town leveled a complaint about someone of color, and used a firm which was from your town?
Why should they think there is actually some body of law to which they can presume a fair verdict can be decided? What qualifications will be required to establish this arbiting firm?
Will there be licensing (who will run it? Who will set the standards? Accredit the schools? etc.) Or is it a case of people who liked your rulings in the past hiring you, because they know how you feel about blacks, and women, and the like?
Is Meller incapable of answering his critics? To ask the question is to answer it!
1) The more things the conspirators faked, the more evidence there is of fakery, and more evidence not only makes for a stronger case, but also more pieces of evidence means that a greater chance that at least one piece of the evidence will be convincing to any given random person they’re trying to convince (“throw everything at the wall and see what sticks”).
2) We think that conspirators who are that powerful and well practiced would operate according to the principle “the simpler, the better”. It seems that many truthers believe the Illuminati/NWO/etc operate according to the principle “the more complex, the better”. Thus, when you somehow have control of planes, don’t fly one into the Pentagon, and fly another one into the ground. No, that would be too simple. Instead, fake a plane flying into the Pentagon, and fake a plane flying into the ground. Much better!
3) Trying to apply common sense outside of its proper bounds. Most of us have no problem accepting that since planes almost full of fuel of travelling in excess or 500 MPH crashing into things is far outside of anything we have personal experience with, our common sense notions of physics and engineering might not apply in those situations. That’s anathema to a lot of truthers. If their common sense tells them that a commercial plane crashing into a sky scraper would show damage before the point of impact (rather than the damage all happening past point of impact, where it can’t be seen by the camera), or even if their common sense says that such a plane would bounce of a sky scraper, then it’s not that their common sense is wrong, but rather that what they’ve witnessed is iron-clad proof of fakery. Either the planes which crashed into the towers weren’t ordinary commercial planes, or there weren’t any plane crashes at all.
Also… re bonds, this is what you said:
Answering a few small queries– “Paleo European” here refers to culture, not technology or politics. I was trying to related features of ancient and (perhaps mediaeval) societies, such as arranged marriages, marriages representing unions of households rather than two individuals, surety bonds to guarantee behavior, competing conflict resolution and arbitration agencies (or experienced and revered “lawsmiths” whose expertise and probity could be used to arbitrate disputes fairly between two parties—and their families–who may hate each other, etc. which could substitute for the inadaquacies, and even despotism of our existing government regulations, statute law, and and other barbarism!
Which is what I was asking. What if you were told to give such a surety bond to Rutee, or Ami, or darksidecat, in lieu of your good behavior?
Would you trust their judgment of your actions?
To ask the question is to answer it!
zhinxy: Outgrow your statist, bureaucratic prejudices, and then look at what we libertarians have to say…
I’m a libertarian, and I have no idea what you just said.
Allow me, I’ve got too much experience with this sort of thing.
He is asserting that we have become so used to the idea of laws, precedent, stability, that we can’t see the simple truths he has set forth.
If we were able to see past those stumbling blocks, we’d agree with him. Since we don’t, we are either willful, or too stupid/ignorant to be set free.
But as to Heinlein… He was less of a libertarian than most Libertarians think. I remind you of Coventry.
Meller: Why you have trouble believing that it was an “inside job” is anybody guess, anyway.
Because I’ve been inside some of the organisations you think pulled that off, and the ability to keep everyone needed to make it work willing to keep their mouths shut isn’t there.
Someone would have written something down, someone would have felt guilty about what happened (because not everyone could have been informed of it’s actual effect). I’ve taken part in conspiracies (nothing like that), and clandestine things, and if you get outside 1: A small inner circle who are taking part in the actual operation, and 2: Anything more than about 20 people, someone will talk about it. So no, experience, (and knowledge of metals, and reading the reports of architects, and structural engineers, and blacksmiths/potters (on how forced air in a closed system acts as a temperature increasing process (which is why wood, which burns at 500°F can be used to make ceramics at more than 2,000°F).
In short, the “evidence” is tissue paper thin, and experience shows that it’s too complicated to have been kept a complete secret for more than 10 years.
Meller: I should think that some favorable mentions of my proposed anartopia are in order, on those feminist (!) grounds, if none other. I mean, youall were the ones who were complaining a blue streak about how married women were supposedly ‘enslaved” in my kind of society.
That would be the one where the women are property, and only men can plead in their behalf. It’s either some dude cherry-picking a firm that will rule his way, or vendetta and feud in the streets?
That’s what you want us to praise?
To ask the question is to answer it!
I think the last 2 or 3 issues of Skeptical Inquirer thoroughly demolished the “9/11 was an inside job” bullshit.
For one the building did NOT fall at free fall speed. That’s just a lie and none of the Truthers ever verify, they just see a building collapsing quickly and if someone is feeding them the idea that this is too fast, then they don’t ever decide to measure it for themselves.
You, and other manboobzers (and manboobzeresses) can enjoy your apocalyptic “Mad Max meets Clockwork Orange” democrazy.
Because two dystopias where criminals run amok are totally what I think of when I think “over-powerful government.”
Wait… we don’t?
/takes off mirrored shades to examine leather long coat and pants.
Damnit! /exits to find appropriately trendy Steam-Punk outfit
Oh, I just wanted to say that bit about me not engaging in the state and capitalism stuff here wasn’t an attempt to nettle you, zhinxy, it was just a general explanation in case anyone was wondering.
I also hated Friday, and don’t recommend it, unless you want to have ammunition for a really, really good argument that certain lines in Stranger in a Strange Land are probably intended to be every bit as rape apologist as they might seem (Heinlein also does a book with creepy semi-wife raising, and there’s some rape apologism in some of his other books too). I mean, there are good points to Heinlein as a writer, but he has a shit ton of problems too.
“Because two dystopias where criminals run amok are totally what I think of when I think “over-powerful government.”
Neither of those would be on my short-list of “societies that feminists idealize”, either.
I should catch up on my reading on conspiracies.
They use Barium to kill the zombies???
Once you kill ’em, you gotta barium.
No, I don’t care what feminists think (frankly I have a lot of trouble after several months on manboobz into believing that you can think at all)
Why have you been here for so long? xD
And for somebody who doesn’t care what feminists think you certainly do seem to! XD
5 or 6 stars huh? 😀 100-120% is pretty darn good 😀
However in MY utopian society,; I wouldn’t exist cuz it’d be all Transformers XD
How many Truthers do we have here btw? o_O Isn’t NWO a Truther too? xD
Meller, I’m not going to argue w/ you. I’m just going to ask how you knowt his. Cuz clearly you didn’t come up w/ a conclusion and THEN found ways to fit the facts into it right? Like you had a blank slate and you found evidence that convinced you and shaped the whole thing without looking for a conclusion right? 😀 So show us this evidence that so convinced you! 😀
I love how Meller thought complimenting me on my appearance would win me over, then when I mock him he goes into “OH I MEANT YOU WEREN’T ACTUALLY SEXY! I SWEAR THAT’S WHAT I MEANT! I DON’T LIKE YOU!!! I DONNNNNNN’TTTT” xD
Sadly, you’re not really my type… I prefer my men more paranoid. xD You don’t even have aluminum foil UNDERWEAR!