The director of the first Human Centipede film – the one about a psychopathic doctor who sews three unwilling and unwitting captives together mouth-to-anus to make a sort of “centipede” — proudly declared that his film was “100% medically accurate.” That is, he found a doctor who was willing to say that if one were indeed to create such a centipede, the second and third segments (i.e., people) would be able to survive, provided that you supplemented their rather dismal diet with IV drips to give them the nutrition they were lacking.
This dubious claim to 100% accuracy came to mind today as I perused a post by the blogger who calls himself Dalrock, a manospherian nitwit with a penchant for pseudoscientific defenses of old-fashioned misogyny. In a post with the whimsical title “We are trapped on Slut Island and Traditional Conservatives are our Gilligan,” Dalrock argues that the best “solution” to out-of-wedlock births is some good old-fashioned slut shaming.
Here’s how he breaks down the (imaginary) numbers in a post that is “100% mathematically accurate” – which is to say, not accurate at all:
Assume we are starting off with 100 sluts and 30 alphas/players. The sluts are happily riding on the alpha carousel. Now we introduce slut shaming. It isn’t fully effective of course, but it manages to convince 15 of the would be sluts not to be sluts after all. This means an additional 15 women are again potentially suitable for marriage. This directly translates into fewer fatherless children. This also makes the next round of slut shaming easier. Instead of having 99 peers eagerly cheering her on her ride, each slut now has 15 happily married women shaming her and only 84 other sluts encouraging her. After the next round this becomes 30 happily married women shaming the sluts, and only 69 other sluts cheering them on, and so on. This process continues until all but the most die hard sluts are off the carousel. You will never discourage them all, but you can do a world better than we are doing today.
Why not shame the fathers as well, while we’re at it? Dalrock explains that this just doesn’t make good mathematical sense:
Start with the same base assumption of 100 sluts and 30 players. Now apply shame to the players. Unfortunately shame is less effective on players than it is on sluts, so instead of discouraging 15% of them (4.5) in the first round, it only discourages three of them. No problem!, says the Gilligan [the social conservative], at least there are now three fewer sluts now that three of the evil alphas have been shamed away, and all without creating any unhappy sluts! But unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. The remaining 27 players are more than happy to service the extra sluts. They are quite maddeningly actually delighted with the new situation. Even worse, the next round of player shaming is even less effective than the first. This time only 2 players are discouraged, and one of the other 3 realizes that his player peers are picking up the slack anyway and reopens for business. This means in net there are still 26 players, more than enough to handle all of the sluts you can throw at them.
Well, there’s no arguing with that!
Seriously, there’s no arguing with that, because it is an imaginary construct with only the most tenuous connection with how things work in the real world. “But … MATH!” doesn’t really work as an argument here, since human beings don’t actually behave according to simplistic mathematical formulas.
Film critic note: While the first Human Centipede film offered little more than a workmanlike treatment of a fantastical idea, the recently released sequel, which details the attempts of a deranged Human Centipede superfan to take human-centipeding to the next level, is actually sort of brilliant. If you like that sort of thing.
Well, you said you had no problem passing judgement on women who get abortions. If a woman is getting an abortion because her contraception failed, then you are passing judgement on her for an accident.
Since during the time most abortions are carried out they have neither brains to feel pain with nor mouths with which to call out, the answer is no.
“I wonder if those little guys and gals gurgle out a little scream of agony in the embryonic fluid as their life is being sucked away?”
No. Would you at least read up on the development of a fetus for crying out loud?
@Voip: You are missing the point.
True dat. Neither are lots of reasons people get abortions. Such as:
-Inability to support or care for a child.
-To end an unwanted pregnancy.
-To prevent the birth of a child with birth defects or severe medical problems.
-Pregnancy resulting from rape or incest.
-Physical or mental conditions that endanger the woman’s health if the pregnancy is continued.
That said, Brandon should go ahead and feel free to judge others and feel superior as he wishes. Being a flat-out asshole has the added benefit of letting others not feel bad when they rightly judge him back.
I think you’re very imaginative.
For Molly Ren
Earlier, when milkboy brought up war as if it was some thing that women foisted on men, because he is a moron, you acted as though it were entirely the state that brought on wars.
You wern’et the only one playing along with the idea that war is really only started by the people at the top, it’s true, but you did perpetuate that meme. This is, to put it lightly, wrong. It’s why Napoleon was considered so very, very dangerous by the European nobility.
I love how guys like NWO will argue that fetuses are autonomous beings, and then scream till they’re blue in the face about how offensive it is that adult women are autonomous beings.
When your entire movement is focused on trying to remove women’s ability to act like autonomous beings it’s an odd anti-abortion argument to choose.
If fetal pain is the issue, NWO should definitely be okay with Plan B, then. The cells aren’t even differentiated–you can’t even tell which part is going to be the brain–at that point. It’s definitely not screaming.
They don’t. In the first trimester, when 90+% of abortions take place, embryos/fetuses have neither pain receptors no vocal cords. If an abortion takes place after that, it’s almost because the fetus is dead already, doomed, or a serious risk to its mother. If you want to make women who are losing what was most likely a wanted pregnancy in such a way feel worse, that says more about you than them.
…almost *always*, dammit.
Which was?
I can’t believe I made it through all of that, all of my hair not (as yet) torn from its follicles. It is a very weird thread where Brandon shows up and is a breath of fresh air. Brandon, you go ahead and judge. I mean, I don’t agree with you about the morality of abortion even a little bit, but I appreciate that you don’t feel you can actually dictate what a woman does with her own pregnancy.
Actually that statement was meant to say that the people at the top’s motivations for war are for their own enrichment and not the health and welfare of the people or done for the reasons that they give us, but okay.
People support war. People support the State. People are the kyriarchy. People enforce queerphobia. People enforce mysogyny. People torture. People kill. People, People, People. Part of Anarchy is realizing there is no “third party” here, no pure outside law to which we are answerable. No ultimate authority. No right over others. Just people, and if we can organize in dysfunctional ways, we can organize ourselves in functional ones. We are not angels, but we are damn well not devils. And anarchy is a place we arrive at together.
Really? Is it an Adam Sandler thing, then? You really, really, really seem to love Big Daddy.
Hmm, I believe I typed out what I support and don’t support re. murder on the prior page. It’s all right there for you to look at, if you care.
Anyway, are you trying to say that feminism support, and even condones, murder?
1. Do you know what feminism means?
2. Do you know what murder means?
@Viscaria: It really is none of my business what people do. However, I think I can make character assessments based on previous behaviors. Again, agreeing with and tolerating something are two different things.
Rutee, it’s your call, but if it were me, I’d let the libertarians argue amongst themselves about who hates the evil state more. It breaks NWO’s endless repetition in a way just about nothing else can, and that’s not nothing.
@Joanna
“No. Would you at least read up on the development of a fetus for crying out loud?”
In the case of an aborted person then, that’d be a silent scream.
It would be a hoot to actually hear just what slaughtering the unborn sounds like. It’s not like it’s a, “sacred moment” or anything. Hey, now there’s an actual 1 in 4 stat feminists can tell the truth about. 1 in 4 babies don’t make it past the abortion slaughterhouse.
Sweet dreams kiddies! Well, for all of you who were graciously granted the right to life anyways.
I’m for sure not arguing with you on that, Brandon. I’m 100%, really and for true appreciating it.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove here. Napoleon may have had widespread popular support, but he also had the first real police state in Europe. France was also the first country in Europe to institute universal conscription.
In other words, you have no intention of showing the same consideration you asked for on initially arriving, and that Ami requested on your behalf. Okay then. Because your horse shit about how horrible the state is, as an absolute, is growing grating and it’s nice to know I have no reason to treat your shallow, harmful views lightly any longer.
Well, I like to think I’m not shallow. 🙂 But if you disagree, there’s not much a girl can do. I’m confused on, “supposed to be two way?” Have I spoken disrespectfully to you? I’m very sorry if that is the case. Truly.
I’m honestly a bit confused here. Can you fill me in?
If someone has no mouth, no pain receptors, and no ability to react to events, that’s not a silent scream. It’s a nonexistent non-scream because a first-trimester fetus bears very little resemblance to anything you would call a baby.
I feel really bad for laughing, but NWOslave is trying to argue that something without a mouth can scream. Is there a German word for feeling horrible about laughing about something?
Which you were going to make by talking about what the ‘big boys’ want instead? You wanted to talk about how everyone behaved by singling out the elite? Okay, but you’re not very good at communication.
Given the acknowledgement of good organization, that seems no more anti-anarchy than pro.