Here’s your Quote of the Day from the Men’s Rights subreddit. Well, not so much of THIS day as of a day four months ago, but, hey, I only discovered it today with the assistance of the AgainstMensRights subreddit. Bonus points if you can tell me what the hell a “public organ-orifice” is and/or how an AVALANCHE can “blare.”
Quite and excellent comment indeed!
And onward marches the World’s Greatest Guaranteed Top Quality Human Man Rights Man-Movement of the Twenty-First Century!
Nope. Disagree with this completely.
At the base, this is making a judgement on those in society unable to work. It demeans the elderly and disabled, and also sets up a system where the wealthy feel justified in feeding back as little as possible into society as a whole.
If you want to feel better about my adventures in gastronomy I can inform you that despite it being nearly April and the south of France the weather is terrible. It is currently raining and blowing a gale 😛
Also, Thinker, many families and couples have arrangements where only one works outside the home and brings in wages.
It works for many of them and often makes most financial sense, in many countries childcare is so expensive that it can swallow most of the income that a job brings in.
So for many people, particularly women, they essentially cannot afford to work, this is particularly the case for low income women.
There’s nothing with an adult person living at the “expense” of another as you so put it, as long as both agree to it and it works for them. It’s the way some people choose or have to live their lives.
For someone going by the name Thinker, there’s not much evidence of that taking place.
Seconding Historiphilia. Even if both people are able-bodied and so on and could technically work, people can choose how they want to live. I supported my husband for a while when he was unemployed, and he has supported me in periods. No one is taking advantage of the other one, because we’re two adults capable of making rational decisions together.
I went to a party and came back and probably should go back and read more comments, but I have been distracted by Historophilia’s gastronomic adventures.
‘Cognitive dissidence’. Is that when you wilfully and with intent refuse to believe obvious, logical, intelligent things that people are saying to you?
That’s… surprisingly apt.
Brz, that article is quite possibly the shittiest article I have ever read. It’s like te mother lode of clueless privilege:
“But Dr Green said victim culture had now become so popular that, if the claims of some victim groups are taken seriously, there are more victims than people in the country.
He said this is because of ‘multiple discrimination’, in which some people are said to be victims on more than one count.
So gay lobby group Stonewall, for example, says that a black gay man experiences prejudice from blacks because he is gay, from gays because he is black, as well as racism and homophobia from everyone else.
On this reckoning, the number of victims amounts to 109 per cent of the population, Dr Green said.”
OH MY GOD WHAT IS INTERSECTIONALITY WELL HM BETTER NOT TAKE THESE WACKY “VICTIMS” SERIOUSLY THEN HUH
But thank you for providing yet another reason not to take people whining about “victim culture” seriously.
“Also flat peaches if ever see them, expensive but glorious.”
This is an incredibly true statement, and I’ve bought them in boring old New England grocery stores, no need for a trip to France! (I’m pre-coffee and thus have nothing relevant to add to the non-food discussion)
Intersectionality fail, and “but my bigotry is justified”
I know I mentioned in passing the genocide in Burma/Myanmar, someone on twitter actually said it’s justified because they’re Muslims. That’s not some “valid criticism”, that’s justifying genocide on racist (islamophobic) grounds. (Also, yes, I lost it at that fool)
Melody: I don’t know where you are, so I don’t know how fault is assigned. I do know the attitude of the cops makes a big difference (as in I was in an accident in Calif. [a “fault” state]. The circumstances were hazy (was mirrorswiping), and the other vehicle was inhabited by idiots. The cop ruled, “fault could not be determined”).
Hugs.
Heh. i see it used most often against those Doms who think they can dominate people into liking their kink, their gender preferences, the Dom, or sometimes try to Dom their way into consent.
One of the weirdest things I see (because I’ve seen it more than once) is somene who is dommy thinking this is because they have some “super-charisma” and that they can dom people in everyday life. I’ve had a couple try this with me. It was amusing (for some value of, “WTF just happened?”) because it usually leads to a level of hurt puppy when it fails.
Argenti: I have got to stop buying grocery store plants. Nothing quite like checking a plant only to discover the long leaves come up from a base 2″ from the bottom of the pot and the roots are a tangled 2″ deep disaster.
I have a bunch of tulips I’ll be putting into dirt when they finish blooming (in the hope next year there will be outdoor tulips).
I am terrified of the condition of the roots on the gardenia I bought, but it gets repotted this week too.
Domly doms who think they can hypnotize people who aren’t subs into obeying them with the power of their personality are so funny. There was one who declared that I must be a sub because I’m a woman (I think he was a Gorean – he was dressed like a Manowar video) and stared intently into my eyes while trying to back me up against the bar. I asked him if he was trying to reproduce the scene where Jack Nicholson comes through the door with the axe in The Shining.
Pecunium — worst I’ve seen required very carefully cutting the plastic container while wiggling the roots free. I other words, if it’ll come out of the pot, you’re in good shape. We’ve got tulips and daffodils, so I’d imagine they’ll survive outside where you are.
Blugh… yeah that bothers me too, especially when people I otherwise agree with (like Maryam Namazie) use that line. I think there’s real value is separating anti-sharia and secular activists who stay focussed on policy and action from loons like Pan Gellar, who believe in irrational conspiracy theories and promote active discrimination as opposed to universal principals.
Because assuming that the Muslims must be the ones who were in the wrong went so well in Yugoslavia…
Also fail because Islamophobia (and homophobia, etc) is not and has never been a psychiatric term. It doesn’t mean you’re mentally ill. It means you’re an asshole.
I did enjoy the example of Asshole Math, though.
Re-reading that, I quoted the wrong area. It bothers me when people try to hide behind the idea that there’s “No such thing as islamophobia”. Justifying genocide goes way the hell beyond “bothered”.
Another horrible recent example was the way some media outlets just assumed that a majority of the men who attacked the young woman on the bus in India would turn out to be Muslim. No particular reason to assume that, and it didn’t happen in a majorty-Muslim area, but hey, it was really brutal and awful so they were probably Muslims, right?
I grew up partly in the Middle East so I have plenty of things to complain about in terms of Islam, but this kind of malicious paranoia is bullshit.
Argenti can I root my poor tiny jade via the stick in water method?
Yes. One of the ways they propagate is falling off the parent and rooting on the ground.
There is some truth in this comment.
It is not right when adult person lives at the expense of someone else.
Bullshit.
It’s not right when someone acts as a knowing parasite. But we are each other’s keepers. Your use of, “at the expense of someone else” implies that any aid to another comes with a harm to someone else.
When we are talking about social issues (as opposed to one on one interactions) this is even more specious a claim.
This, completely, ignores the nature of that, “the expense of someone else”. I suspect you don’t believe in an absolute communism; where no one has more than any other. But the CEO of Conoco just got something more than $150 million to leave his job.
He got that money, “at the expense of someone else”. A lot of someone elses. A lot of someone elses who could have made better use of that money than he will.
So you are saying he shouldn’t be allowed to have that money?
Historophilia: You sound just like someone who has gone to Calif. from the East Coast.
You can get the ball zuchinni here! My farmers market has them. So does Berkeley Bowl, but then again, they have everything.
(For foodies that store is like Disneyland.)