Politics/Slapfights - Ancient history to modern day!

[TTTX]

Thankfully there are several very competent first female leaders around the world to show that competence and gender are two entirely independent things. Like Angela Merkel or Jacinda Ardern.

yeah, however much like their male counter parts they also have their idiots and manipulators, example our first female Primeminister always had her shirt button less up during election time so you could see more of her cleavage.

[Sinekein]

I'm sure you would be unable to discuss anything about the clothing habits of the tens of male Danish PMs that have been in power, and yet it just so happens that you know this detail about the one female PM. That's just disgusting to read. Clueless sexism at its finest.

Anyway.

CNN, ABC and Fox have called a Biden win. Trump is currently playing golf.

Edit: Drudge Report also called it:



Man those liberal snowflakes have a mean streak.

Edit 2: Obviously being his usual gracious self, Trump refuses to concede. Friendly reminder that "Crooked Hillary" did so when the race was called.

[Mobius_118]

Can't wait to deal with the aftermath. We have a lot of work to do to fix donnie's fuckups, although with bitch McConnel still in it's going to be a rough time.

But first, let's see how trump handles losing. I want his meltdown on international TV, for all the world to see.

[Alienmorph]

I'm sure you would be unable to discuss anything about the clothing habits of the tens of male Danish PMs that have been in power, and yet it just so happens that you know this detail about the one female PM. That's just disgusting to read. Clueless sexism at its finest.

Okay so... "Our first female leader likes to dress sexy to look more appealing to the public" ----> "you're sexist for noticing it!"

I'm sorry, but that's not sexist, unfortunately some women DO that. For example, I remember when I was in art colledge. Everyone would just dress casual and comfy most of the time, men and women alike, yet whenever there was an exam, and the professor was a straight guy, half the girls having to do the exam would show up wearing push-up bras, high heels and shirts with lots of cleavage. Especially the ones who very notorious lazy and would often non study properly in preparation of the exam. Pretty sure one or two of them outright sucked their way to promotion too, in fact.

Now, claiming every girl/woman having a career does/did that WOULD be horribly sexist, but if you think nobody does, you're either very naive or have only met outstanding people in your life wich... good for you in the latter case.

----------------

Anyway... buh-bye Donald! Don't let the door hit your flabby ass when they kick you out of office!

I personally think that those calling it a phyrric victory are likely correct, sadly. But hey... one less idiot with too much power at his fingertips is still something worth celebrating.

[Sinekein]

Okay so... "Our first female leader likes to dress sexy to look more appealing to the public" ----> "you're sexist for noticing it!"

Again. When is male clothing ever noticed? When is it ever a topic of conversation? I mean Fox tried to make Obama's beige suit a thing, but that was (stupid) anti-Obama stuff, not something directed at him because he's a guy.

Some male politicians are rather athletic and like to wear form-fitting suits, why is it never seen as "trying to look sexy & appealing to the public" - Justin Trudeau, Paul Ryan, it's not like there is a lack of examples? It's the exact same thing, but I guess in their case it is "looking good", not "looking sexy", so it's fine, right?

There is a gigantic double standard regarding clothes in politics. One day, one of our MPs wore a flowery dress in the National Assembly. Some old guys whistled. Like the Tex Avery wolf.

And when the first thing you mention about a politician you are critical about is that she had a cleavage at some point, you are an idiot. Period. People who criticize Trump don't start by saying "look how long his stupid red ties are, unforgivable". I am pretty sure it came from political opponents who hoped that such a lazy remark would be parrotted by useful idiots, and apparently it worked, and it did not even require to talk about ideas or anything. It hits right into the usual "women are only ever able of seducing men, they are no good on their own" cliché.

[Alienmorph]

Again. When is male clothing ever noticed? When is it ever a topic of conversation? I mean Fox tried to make Obama's beige suit a thing, but that was (stupid) anti-Obama stuff, not something directed at him because he's a guy.

Please, people have been making fun of Trump's ridiculously tanned skin and pointed it out as a proof he was an idiot since before he was elected, and I've heard and seend things like people who literally didn't want to vote for a male politician from around here because "he looks too much like Mister Bean". And don't even get me started on the likes of Matteo Salvini cosplaying as every kind of public worker under the sun just to look like a man of the people. Folks are fucking shallow and will grasp at anything to confirm their biases.

I can agree there's a double standard in what people notice about men and what they noticed about women. That is one of those unfortunate truths we should work on as a society in general. But again... doesn't there no women who exploit their appareance or others public biases, or that being aware of it makes you automatically dumb or malicious.

[Mobius_118]

I just thought he talked a lot of shit for being a fat old man with ill-tailored clothing, an obviously fake tan, and fake hair.

Especially when he said he was fit, natural, and healthy. That's what irritated me more, his constant, demonstrably false narrative. That's about as far as I got in caring about his appearance.

Women in politics, I could care less what they look or dress like. I care about policy and loyalty to the people that elected them more.

[Alienmorph]

I just thought he talked a lot of shit for being a fat old man with ill-tailored clothing, an obviously fake tan, and fake hair.

But you still noticed those things, and they helped reinforce the impression you had of the guy.

And apparently that's fine doing such considerations with male politicians, but is automatically sexist in Sine's world if you do it with female politicians/women in charge.

I personally think it's silly in both instances, but again, people are often shallow and eager to grasp at straws. Had Trump looked like a marble statue of Adonis, he'd still be a shit person, but many folks will get more easily behind or against a leader who looks and act a certain way, even if their toughts and actions contradict the fake persona thei're trying to build.

And being aware of such cheap tactics doesn't sound to me like it should be stupid or controversial. If anything, being able to distinguish when those people are being genuine and when thei're exploiting dumb biases sounds like ag good skill to have rather than the opposite.

[Mobius_118]

His history did. His policies did. His looks only had bearing on the personality.

Someone who actually did their job as President, didn't do all the shit trump did, could look like trump and I'd care more about the policies.

[TTTX]

I'm sure you would be unable to discuss anything about the clothing habits of the tens of male Danish PMs that have been in power, and yet it just so happens that you know this detail about the one female PM. That's just disgusting to read. Clueless sexism at its finest.

mind you she was up for election 3 times for Primeminister she lost the first time, won the second time and lost the third (so you know 12 years) so I saw her a lot during those years and every time it was election time her shirt was always a bit more open and soon as election time was over her shirt was more button up at least until the next election (and it was obvious if you saw how she dressed normally to how she dressed during election time), I didn't really notice it in the first election because she was basically an unknown at that point, however it became rather noticeable the second time around especially since she was always button up before then.

Mind you I wanted another woman to be Primeminister who was also a politician at the time, who was older, had a brain between her ears, had a back bone and you know could do her goddamn job.

our male politicians are basically copy paste how they dressed suits (so are the women expect they have skirts instead of pants) and sometimes ties, they looks like they are dressed for business meetings and such, our first female Priminister was more of an exception rather then the rule and it was rather noticeable especially when you see every time it was election time, but then again it wasn't like she had anything else she could offer and it's the only thing she is remembered for is being the first female Danish Primeminister and nothing else unless you remember she got off scoot free from breaking the law.

Okay so... "Our first female leader likes to dress sexy to look more appealing to the public" ----> "you're sexist for noticing it!"

I'm sorry, but that's not sexist, unfortunately some women DO that. For example, I remember when I was in art colledge. Everyone would just dress casual and comfy most of the time, men and women alike, yet whenever there was an exam, and the professor was a straight guy, half the girls having to do the exam would show up wearing push-up bras, high heels and shirts with lots of cleavage. Especially the ones who very notorious lazy and would often non study properly in preparation of the exam. Pretty sure one or two of them outright sucked their way to promotion too, in fact.

Now, claiming every girl/woman having a career does/did that WOULD be horribly sexist, but if you think nobody does, you're either very naive or have only met outstanding people in your life wich... good for you in the latter case.

which is basically what our first female primeminister is, a lazy, dumb, incompetent, criminal (which she and her husband got away with after her friends pulled a lot of strings when she and her husband accused of tax evasion or fraud I can't quite remember, but I know they both got out scoot free after they removed the leader investigator with one her friends and it was the year she became Priminister, disgusting) and not to mention no loyalty to Denmark what so ever who used her good looks and connections to get ahead in life.

she is still considered one of the Primeministers worst we have ever had, IMO.

[Alienmorph]

Someone who actually did their job as President, didn't do all the shit trump did, could look like trump and I'd care more about the policies.

And that's how it should be. Actions should matter more than looks, but unfortunately what should things should be and what things are rarely matches.

[Sinekein]

But you still noticed those things, and they helped reinforce the impression you had of the guy.

And apparently that's fine doing such considerations with male politicians, but is automatically sexist in Sine's world if you do it with female politicians/women in charge.

Or for fuck's sake that is demonstrably not what I said.

You can talk about someone's appearance. Especially when it is something, let's say striking about one's physical appearance. Like Obama's ears, Trump's - or Berlusconi's - artificial tans, Chirac's nose, Sarkozy's size. But they are discussed because they are unique about the person. Like Angela Merkel's (or Queen Elizabeth's) colored clothes, if we go into female public person territory. They can be mocked or not depending on your opinion, but those are unique characteristics.

Looking at a woman's cleavage just plays right into the "evil seductress only succeeding through her looks" cliché.

And seriously, re-read the conversation. Theo mentions that Kamala Harris will be the first female VP. TT's first reaction, for crying out loud, is to point out "you know we had that female polician who showed cleavage to get elected". What kind of bullshit non sequitur is that, except "I NEED TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT SOME WOMEN BAD". As if it was a requirement to the conversation here.

If your first reaction to discussing the first female VP in the US is to remind everyone that some women are terrible - which is true, I don't deny that - by using an example of one that used her looks in her career, then well fuck you, you are a sexist idiot, I stand by my point.

Seriously, imagine in 2008, someone reacting to Obama's election by talking about Sidi Amin Dada but "it's not racist I swear there's just that horrible black guy who led a country back in the day, totally unrelated comment".

[Alienmorph]

Perhaps it was poorly worded on TTTX's part, but what he was pointing out, or at least that's how I've read it, is that Kamalha Harriss being a woman doesn't make her automatically a good (or bad, for that matter) politician and that she'll have to prove herself in the incoming months, and that one of the worst leaders in his country's recent history was a woman to reinforce his statement. Then we got stuck on the stupid part, because he noted that said person would also use her looks as an advantage and you went "THAT's all you noticed? SEXIST!"

Correct me if I've missed something.

[TTTX]

If your first reaction to discussing the first female VP in the US is to remind everyone that some women are terrible - which is true, I don't deny that - by using an example of one that used her looks in her career, then well fuck you, you are a sexist idiot, I stand by my point.

I could try and argue with you, but my depression is bothering me today, so I'll just say Fuck you too, idealist.

Perhaps it was poorly worded on TTTX's part, but what he was pointing out, or at least that's how I've read it, is that Kamalha Harriss being a woman doesn't make her automatically a good (or bad, for that matter) politician and that she'll have to prove herself in the incoming months, and that one of the worst leaders in his country's recent history was a woman to reinforce his statement. Then we got stuck on the stupid part, because he noted that said person would also use her looks as an advantage and you went "THAT's all you noticed? SEXIST!"

Correct me if I've missed something.

yeah writing isn't my strongest suit (barely passed my exams on in as a matter of fact).

you pretty hit my point right on the head, in other words you are correct.

[Sinekein]

Perhaps it was poorly worded on TTTX's part, but what he was pointing out, or at least that's how I've read it, is that Kamalha Harriss being a woman doesn't make her automatically a good (or bad, for that matter) politician and that she'll have to prove herself in the incoming months, and that one of the worst leaders in his country's recent history was a woman to reinforce his statement. Then we got stuck on the stupid part, because he noted that said person would also use her looks as an advantage and you went "THAT's all you noticed? SEXIST!"

Correct me if I've missed something.

Isn't that implied for absolutely anyone? Why is it required to point it out in that particular case exactly?

Biden will be 46, which means that the 45 previous presidents and VPs were men. The probability of it happening just by accident without gender being an issue is, for the record, 0,000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 081%. That's flipping a normal coin on the same side 90 times in a row.

The other explanation is that there was a gender issue at work, and that Kamala Harris becoming VP is a step towards reducing it. You can either acknowledge it - not even celebrate it, acknowledge it - or somehow you can feel attacked, and defensively say that she might suck, as if it was not a given for every single politician ever elected.

[FrozenShadow]

There is also the question of what exactly would constitute evidence, if not personal anecdotes from voters, poll watchers, USPS employees, videos of suspicious behavior,

Since it has started becoming obvious that the vote was not swinging their way, a bunch of Trumpists have decided that anything their brain cannot compute - which means, sadly, a lot of things - was "sus" and "proof of Dem fraud"; If the US have to check all of those loonies' conspiracy theories before the elections are over, the next president will be elected in 2030. Also, the fun thing about those idiots is the only thing you can prove, in their mind, is that they are right and that they won. Which means that even if there is extensive police work that shows how completely bogus their claims are, they will still deny it's the truth and call for "deep state" or whatever.

You can thank Trump for that, he's the one who has been promoting stupid conspiracy theories as long as it validated the most idiotic thoughts of his fanbase. His motto is "I am always right and those that are with me are also always right", which means that now some morons are convinced that whatever they think they know, it is the only possible truth, as cultists are wont to do.

Well, let's be honest here, it's not just Trump and his believers that are the issue here. We are actually now living is some sort of post-facts world.

You know, a world where facts doesn't matter as much as how individuals views of those said facts. (This had some real good term to describe this, just can't get it my head right now.) And it's not just about individuals and their views of the facts, but this thing had infected justice system too.

I mean, just recently Johnny Depp lost this "wife beater" libel case against Amber Heard in UK court. Hell, the Judge basically said that there are facts stating that Johnny Depp was right and Amber Heard was the one, who was doing the abuse and beating. Yet, the Judge decided that no one those facts matters as The Judge ruled the case in Sun magazines favor. And now Johnny Depp is kicked out of Fantastic Beast 3.

And this is just one example of many. As matters of fact,ever since the metoo started, this had happened a lot. Basically, metoo had become exactly what I suspected it would be. It would started well and some men, who had really abused their positions and power would be hold accountable. But metoo will just become a weapon for Women to make bogus charges and get men fired from their jobs or in problem is some other way. And now it's so bad that women doesn't even need to show evidence of wrong doings, it's just enough to cry out on twitter and men reputation is ruined. I just fear how bad this will become, if Johnny Depp will lose the actual case that's going on right now.

But that's not all. We see this thing everywhere. Someone is blamed of doing something wrong on social media, this person will get kicked out of school, work or life ruined as social media "truth" is automatically believed without any real investigation. After that, wrongly blamed person often goes to actual court with the case and even they will eventually won, person(s) who lied and made up charges don't even get really punished for their lies.

To but it simply, we now live in a world, where you're pretty guilty until proven innocent, while it should be other way around.

[Alienmorph]

Isn't that implied for absolutely anyone? Why is it required to point it out in that particular case exactly?

Yes, then why is it a problem to say that a woman politicial needs to prove herself just as much as man would? Why did you immediately pulled out the "sexism card" like we were on Twitter?

And no, I don't feel threatened that someone who isn't exactly like me, becomes VP of some other country ffs. I really don't care either way, as long as they do their job well and don't leave the world worse than it was when they started. I'm an egalitarian, I believe that as much as possible we should all have the same rights and opportunities and the same responsabilities. If a woman is the best person to take a position of power, then she should have it. I'm honestly getting tired of needing to spell these things out right because you're so eager to jump to conclusions.

[Sinekein]

I mean, just recently Johnny Depp lost this "wife beater" libel case against Amber Heard in UK court. Hell, the Judge basically said that there are facts stating that Johnny Depp was right and Amber Heard was the one, who was doing the abuse and beating. Yet, the Judge decided that no one those facts matters as The Judge ruled the case in Sun magazines favor. And now Johnny Depp is kicked out of Fantastic Beast 3.

And this is just one example of many. As matters of fact,ever since the metoo started, this had happened a lot. Basically, metoo had become exactly what I suspected it would be. It would started well and some men, who had really abused their positions and power would be hold accountable. But metoo will just become a weapon for Women to make bogus charges and get men fired from their jobs or in problem is some other way. And now it's so bad that women doesn't even need to show evidence of wrong doings, it's just enough to cry out on twitter and men reputation is ruined. I just fear how bad this will become, if Johnny Depp will lose the actual case that's going on right now.

Depp lost the libel case, the judge did not state he was not a victim of violence himself because it was not what was judged. For the record, Amber Heard has been kicked out of Aquaman too.

From what I gathered those were two people being in an extremely unhealthy and probably drug-filled relationship. Except they were famous so all of it ended up as something public.

Social network mobs are a problem too, I won't deny it - they're however unrelated to the issue of conspiracies.

And no, I don't feel threatened that someone who isn't exactly like me, becomes VP of some other country ffs. I really don't care either way, as long as they do their job well and don't leave the world worse than it was when they started. I'm an egalitarian, I believe that as much as possible we should all have the same rights and opportunities and the same responsabilities. If a woman is the best person to take a position of power, then she should have it. I'm honestly getting tired of needing to spell these things out right because you're so eager to jump to conclusions.

I reacted to TTTX and his history of posting here, not to you.

If your first reflex when women's rights are discussed is to remind everyone that some women are bad, then I think it shows a degree of hostility to the topic. I mean, I'm guilty of it too. When some new video about cultural content producers like Marvel or DC being corrupt or something is posted, my first reflex when I care to comment is to say that among the critics are a number of idiots or toxic people. Which, I mean, is true, but if I was favorable to that that's definitely not what I would mention first.

[FrozenShadow]

...Go fuck yourself asshole.

I'm pretty sure Mazder was being sarcastic.

No, I wasn't.
Fuck religion.
Especially when it's given actual powers/pervasive inclusion for governments and tax exemption status to the point where being a Pastor in a church in the South can make you a fucking mint, yet will also spout "don't be greedy" whilst rolling around in their fucking jets.

Or calling a Jihad and killing everyone in sight not a part of your specific sect.

Honestly the only religion I am somewhat okay with, especially of the Ibrahimic faiths, is Judaism. Because at least they leave everyone the fuck alone!!!
That and Buddhists.

Basically anything that doesn't want convert everyone to itself is fine by me.

You know, I completely agree with you. There is nothing wrong with faith or belief in God or Gods (Hinduism).

But for some reason, every single religion becomes an issue, when they become organized. No matter the religion, it will be used to justify horrible deeps or outright weaponized (Crusades and Jihad comes to mind right away). The same way religion is often used to get personal gains for many of it's members. And no one can even deny that. Just look at those child abuser/pedo Catholic Priests cases around the world and then look at where most of those priests are right now.....in Vatican in some quite nice positions or those that are punished gets slap on the wrist.

Evangelist in America are also really bad. Basically they are just using religion and people faith to get rich themselves.

Islam...well doesn't need much of thinking here. It's probably the worst of all religions. But it's not because of terrorism as most think right away. No, the true issue is the fact whole religion is based on hypocrisy and overblown ambiguous interpretations. Most of the Koran was originally made, when Islam was pretty much conquering the well known world at the time and lots of the religion mirror that. And let's not forget this whole Jihad concept. Largest reason, why terrorist used it is become it's perfectly acceptable, even favored part of Islams holy book. Terrorist just need to pick the most violent parts/teaching from Koran and they have the base to build on and sell their followers.

Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism. None are outright violent religions on themselves. But these are religions that are also quite nicely weaponizable. All of them have some teaching or aspects that can be used for violence or at least justify the violent deeds. And when this is done, it's often done to benefits the current ruling government or individuals at the expense of the followers/believers.

As for Taoism and Confucianism, those are not as much as religions as they're view of life. Both basically rely on self-improvement and living harmoniously, while respecting everyone else. But unlike Christianity that tries to do the same, Taoism and Confucianism aren't based on either fear in general or fear of punishment like it's with Christianity. And let's not even try to deny this fact. It starts with Ten Commandments (not denying that these ain't good rules to live by, quite the contrary), but ain't in no way limited to that. Basically, lots of Christianity teaching tries to make its believers to act or do things certain way out fear as if they don't, they will be punished either in this life or most often in some form of afterlife.

Yes, someone might feel that I'm coming rather strong at Christianity here or even offending someone beliefs, but that's not what I'm doing here. Like said in beginning, I have no issue if someone here have personal beliefs. It's between you and God. Or at least it should be, which is the problem. Because with religions, there is always someone else trying to say how you should live or what's right way to live your life.

[FrozenShadow]

Can't wait to deal with the aftermath. We have a lot of work to do to fix donnie's fuckups, although with bitch McConnel still in it's going to be a rough time.

But first, let's see how trump handles losing. I want his meltdown on international TV, for all the world to see.

Sadly, I fear this was just first round of these elections with more to come. Trump is crazy enough to go for more rounds and he has enough supporters to go along with it.

[Mobius_118]

Can't wait to deal with the aftermath. We have a lot of work to do to fix donnie's fuckups, although with bitch McConnel still in it's going to be a rough time.

But first, let's see how trump handles losing. I want his meltdown on international TV, for all the world to see.

Sadly, I fear this was just first round of these elections with more to come. Trump is crazy enough to go for more rounds and he has enough supporters to go along with it.

Yeah, probably.

I mean, I'd like to see him lose again, unless his supporters decide to start burning the ballot counting places. That's the only way he'd win at this point is through terrorism.

[TTTX]

For the record, Amber Heard has been kicked out of Aquaman too.

I haven't heard her being fired as of yet, at best I have heard her role might be downsized in Aquaman 2 so I have no idea where you got that information.

[TTTX]

Sadly, I fear this was just first round of these elections with more to come. Trump is crazy enough to go for more rounds and he has enough supporters to go along with it.

yeah, now the real fight begins.

Now the question is how ugly is it going to get?

[TheodoricFriede]

Again. When is male clothing ever noticed? When is it ever a topic of conversation?
.

Describe Donald Trumps tie for me.

[Sinekein]

It is rather long.

I however have trouble linking it with some kind of manipulation on his part, like "it's a sign of someone seducing the voters" or "it proves he's two-faced".

[TheodoricFriede]

I just think you should be careful with double edged swords.

[Sinekein]

I assume it belongs here: Spitting Image is making its episodes fully available on Youtube.

Yes, they mock Trump and Johnson and Pence and Cummings and Patel.

But they also mock Starmer and Biden and Ardern and Greta Thunberg.

And Lewis Hamilton and Prince Harry and The Rock and Disney Execs.

(And that's only episode 1)

[Mazder]

Spitting Image is basically "take the piss out of everyone", it's the exact amount of snarky Brit humour we need right now!

Also
THE UPLOADER HASN'T MADE IT AVAILABLE IN YOUR COUNTRY?!?!?!
I'M IN THE FUCKING COUNTRY IT'S MADE IN!!!
FUUUUUCKING HELL I HATE THIS INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT BULLSHIT!!!

[Sinekein]

I guess that it's because it's on Britbox in the UK, and as such can be legally watched?

In any event I got through all 7 episodes so far, and it was fun. A bit gross at times, mostly when featuring Trump, but there were some great skits, like Pelosi being diagnosed with "panderism", the Disney exec reunion, Xi Jinping's TikTok video, or anything with either Jared and Ivanka, or Greta Thunberg (I loved Greta watching football). It's uneven obviously but worth a watch, and they really take no prisoners.

I also saw that some great voice actors were involved, like Phil Lamarr and Indira Varma (♥).

[Mazder]

I guess that it's because it's on Britbox in the UK, and as such can be legally watched?

In any event I got through all 7 episodes so far, and it was fun. A bit gross at times, mostly when featuring Trump, but there were some great skits, like Pelosi being diagnosed with "panderism", the Disney exec reunion, Xi Jinping's TikTok video, or anything with either Jared and Ivanka, or Greta Thunberg (I loved Greta watching football). It's uneven obviously but worth a watch, and they really take no prisoners.

I also saw that some great voice actors were involved, like Phil Lamarr and Indira Varma (♥).

Yeah, but only if you pay.
Which is kinda bollocks.
We get charged but the rest of the world gets it free. Fuck I hate that shit in this digital age.

[Vol]

Well, a fight it's going to be. The legal arguments are on far better ground in PA with "unequal treatment by PA government based on party" in addition to zombie votes and such. I'm hearing the first round of lawsuits were tossed for not claiming _enough_ votes could be affected to change the result. Bunch of signed affidavits coming in to the courts, claims of outright illegal behavior at the poll counting, more leaks, more questions.

It seems increasingly likely the SCOTUS is going to have to weigh in on this. The PA bench legislation by their SC, for one. I have no idea if there's possibly enough proof to overturn any state results, but if nothing else, some long overdue election reform might come out of it.

Time is precious tho, and spoilation of evidence is already intrinsic to the claims.

https://morningconsult.com/form/trackin ... elections/

Bit worrying, those numbers.

[Mobius_118]

I like how the GOP commits all the fraud, then accuses the other side.

[Sinekein]

https://morningconsult.com/form/tracking-voter-trust-in-elections/

Bit worrying, those numbers.

I wonder who started to claim that the only true outcome was a GOP win and that anything else meant that the Democrats cheated.

Hopefully whoever succeeds Trump to lead the GOP will have at least a basic level of ethics.

[Mobius_118]

Ethics? Try intelligence.

There's no voter fraud. Bitch McConnell is still in the Senate.

[Sinekein]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha7iWECm_8E

A summary of the various Trump campaign lawsuits, and their outcomes or where they're at.

[SciFlyBoy]

Hopefully whoever succeeds Trump to lead the GOP will have at least a basic level of ethics.

I don't consider Trump GOP. He kind of hijacked it for a couple years, but he wasn't raised in it or born in it. Hopefully it's a chance for a younger more moderate personality.

[TTTX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siY0n4PpBXw&ab

there is not enough face palms in the world for how stupid this is.

[Vol]

Not much has changed. Some lawsuits got dismissed, more got filed, there was one victory in PA that got 9-10k ballots that weren't counted yet put aside. Trump, his loyalists (as opposed to the GOP in general), and his lawyers seem supremely confident, but none of us are privy to why. Seems like something about the voting tabulation machines have major issues, but that's inferring. So we're still waiting to see how this is going to play out.

In lighter news, Fox News is taking a bit of beating with their new turn towards the center. Newsmax has been poaching the disaffected, seems like, other than Tucker and Hannity still holding steady. Why Fox would turn on the people who made them so big, to court the people who already have multiple other stations of the identical leanings and don't like them, is truly a mystery. Though as we see with TX's link, and so many other times these last few years, ideology has overtaken "making money" for some.

Even lighter news, got past the part of P5 Royal where the mincing gay couple molest Ryuji, then again on the beach. I can't honestly tell what they altered, because they were still stereotypical camp, sexually aggressive, and big gay jokes. So I guess the people mortally offended by the concept of mocking gays lost, and people who wanted a proper translation lost, and some Japanese man was probably very confused by all this.

[TheodoricFriede]

Even lighter news, got past the part of P5 Royal where the mincing gay couple molest Ryuji, then again on the beach. I can't honestly tell what they altered, because they were still stereotypical camp, sexually aggressive, and big gay jokes. So I guess the people mortally offended by the concept of mocking gays lost, and people who wanted a proper translation lost, and some Japanese man was probably very confused by all this.

Rather than actively trying to fuck Ryuji, they merely passively try to do it by convincing him to dress up in drag.

I get a strong feeling this was never about them being gay, and always about them wanting to fuck a teenager. Because its different when its gay men instead of straight women apparently.

[Sinekein]

I don't know that much about Japanese society aside from a couple of history videos and, obviously, various games, mangas and animes, but I am starting to wonder if the accusations of them being anti-LGBT might not be misunderstood.

Not because there is no homophobia, because I'm not naive, but I wonder whether the issue at hand with "negative portrayals" of LGBT characters might not be due to how visible they are.

Japanese people seem to be, on average, much more private than Western ones - even though the West is not a monolith and some cultures are more exuberant than others - so I'm starting to think that the reason you see so many cliché, obviously camp LGBT characters is because what rubs Japanese people the wrong way is the "obviously" part. As if, were they private instead, they wouldn't be that bothered.

Basically, I'm starting to think that the accusations of homophobia in Japanese content do not come from them being fundamentally anti-LGBT, but from them not liking "pride" movements as a whole because it goes against their culture to shove in everyone's faces something that they consider to be a personal topic.

[Vol]

@Theo: Ah. It did seem less outright aggressive, but I wasn't sure, since I didn't pay much attention to them beyond the camp joke. Maybe. Kamoshida's "final act of evil" was the implied rape, so it would deflate the evil if it was treated as pure levity in a comedic context.

@Sine: It is misunderstood, solely on the basis that we have no common history with them, thus any analysis of their cultural context without discarding our own is going to assume motivations that aren't there. At least until contact was made, and then more intense impositions after WW2.

But I would imagine you're fairly correct. Any shame, of moral claims, wouldn't make as much sense as it being a matter of disturbing the "wa" with bizarre, self-aggrandizing behavior. Hence, Hard Gay. Then the generalized homophobia could come into place concerning their socially placid, but non-productive, relationship.

Though as I understand it, having done very little research, female/female physical relationships are treated as sort of childish, something you're expected to grow out of when it's time to find a husband. Male/male was codified and common in their medieval period, but I don't know anything about how it's taken now. I might guess based only on the volume and content of a certain genre of homemade porn, that it's seen as somewhat shameful to be publicly known as gay, but that's inferring a lot from a little.

I would like to see a study of westerners, without the threat of social lynching for being honest, on whether they think the model you hypothesized or the model we have is superior.

[TTTX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsCX0tKzdQk&ab

Some good news is always nice.

[Alienmorph]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAH7YsXWFyM

California is banning classic anti-racist novels from schools, because they were written by white guys and use the N-word a lot, which means thei're STILL racist. Ffs.

[TTTX]

California is banning classic anti-racist novels because from schools, because they were written by white guys and use the N-word a lot, which means thei're STILL racist. Ffs.

the nazis would be proud that's for sure.

[Vol]

Either these people are being totally earnest, and they truly believe that giving examples of racism in order to demonstrate why racism is bad carries a mystical taint that transcends all other considerations, or, they're trying to destroy culture and art just as they did in the past. I'm inclined to think it's a bit of both, an initial intent that has now manifested as primitive chants about bad words carrying magical powers.

I'd like to know what the result is supposed to be if you destroy culture and mutate history without any central authority. That certainly appears to be the intent, but so far it seems to create dysfunctional people that don't make babies, so it might be a self-correcting issue.

Also a good example of why persistence and aggression, no matter how illogical or harmful, gets results. Progress always beats stasis, for good or ill. Surely these sentiments and actions won't be a future issue as huwhites dwindle as a population.

[TheodoricFriede]

The books of Americas greatest author, Mark Twain, banned and, maybe figuratively maybe not not, burning.

Anyone who supports this shit?

Die. Please. Do the universe a favor and put a fucking gun in your mouth.

[Sinekein]

Reminds me of that teacher in Canada who got suspended because she pronounced the word "nigger" in an academic context. Even better: she was discussing how some communities are now using as a symbol of pride words that initially were a derogatory slur, like "queer".

Story is here: https://www.en24news.com/2020/10/the-st ... right.html

In French, there is a very important literature theory named La Négritude - could roughly translate as "The Niggerism" - founded by great french-speaking African and Caribbean writers (like first Senegal president Léopold Sédar Senghor, or Martinique's Aimé Césaire), which the authors named like this so that they, not racist assholes, would own the N-word. I am pretty sure that the dumb fucks who lynched the teacher on Twitter would both believe that "black culture" is not talked about enough due to racism, but that you should absolutely not be allowed to talk about "La Négritude" if you're white.

Those people are dumber than bricks. That's the same level of righteous purity than religious zealots display. It's sickening. The worst part is I am 100% sure it is a vocal minority at work here, and that if you ask 100 black people about this, you won't get 50+ agreeing with the decision - or with those books being forbidden.

Also, this year, Agatha Christie's greatest novel, which since forever has been in French named Ten little niggers, has been renamed They were ten. Eye-rolls intensify.

However, to see that it was voted in Disney's home city itself made me chuckle. Maybe this town's councilors are all the Disney employees that take such great care to make all their products as bland as possible.

[TheodoricFriede]

Also, this year, Agatha Christie's greatest novel, which since forever has been in French named Ten little niggers, has been renamed They were ten. Eye-rolls intensify.

...Why wouldn't they just use the incredible English name "And Then There Were None"?

[Sinekein]

I assume that it's stylistic. The translation of "And Then" in French, Et puis, is not very elegant, especially in a title. Translating it elegantly would probably lead to something like Il n'en resta plus or Il ne resta plus personne - No one remained.

Also, it avoids spoiling the ending in a way, although how much it matters for a book as famous as this one is debatable.

[Vol]

I do wish English was more lyrical.

But yeah, in the last few years, there's been a number of professors who've been fired or punished for actually saying slurs aloud in discussions where they were appropriate. Seem to recall a story about a law professor getting in trouble for even discussing the topic, or one of similar emotional intensity, but the details elude me. In high school, when we read aloud in English class, I do remember that when curse words or slurs came up, whoever was reading would almost always skip it, and the teachers would too. Sometimes a student wouldn't, but no one ever reacted negatively.

This has a sense of trying to shroud the past in mysticism, sort of like how every few years a new story about Hitler being an even more physically bizarre, deranged pervert comes out. As if the reality of what happened isn't enough to justify the message you wish to send. The actions the Nazis factually undertook are sufficient to say they were bad, there is no need to dramatize or censor history to emphasize that point, and the existence of people who deny it is irrelevant so long as they don't possess power.

But in the case of western race relations, because what is being demanded and done to us is so irrational and harmful, it requires that the recent past be more extreme than it was. So Huck Finn is a problem, he treats Jim too decently. Atticus Finch is a problem, blacks were never defended until the enlightened "now". Chattel slavery is too long ago to justify specifically excluding white people from jobs or ignoring racial violence against them. You need Jim Crow on steroids, you need Emmett Till writ large. You need KKK lurking in every crack in the sidewalk. You need cartoon characters, ala RDR2, not normal people who had antiquated notions. You need common racial slurs to have magical powers, that cripple or enrage when spoken or read, that demand harsh punishment for any utterance, past or present.

And so, if you control what people learn, the solution is very simple. Change the past, shroud it in vague evil and mystery, and then the present solutions speak for themselves.