YOU DON’T OWE YOUR PARENTS ANYTHING
IT WAS THEIR CHOICE TO HAVE, KEEP AND RAISE YOU BUT IT WASN’T YOUR CHOICE TO BE THEIR CHILD
ANY EXPECTATIONS OR IDEALS THEY TRY AND ENFORCE ON YOU ARE BULLSHIT IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THEM
THEY SHOULD ACCEPT THEIR CHILD AS THEY ARE NOT JUDGE THEM ON A MINOR DETAIL THAT DOESN’T AFFECT THEIR LIFE
DO NOT FEEL BAD IF YOU AREN’T THE PERFECT CHILD YOUR PARENTS THINK YOU SHOULD BE
governmentsgetgirlfriends is a sociopath and a danger to society, and I sincerely hope that someone contacts the proper authorities in Croatia or where the fuck ever he lives so he can never hurt anyone for as long as he lives. (via twoshibaswalkedintoabar)
This dude is either a troll or is an actual danger to society and needs actual therapeutic help.
Wow, I can’t believe this guy can’t find a girlfriend, he seems like a prize.
Yeah….a prize on the new reality TV show “Who Wants To Date a Misogynistic Cockmonger?”.
Wednesdays at 10 on Fox.
Using the Threat of Violence to Shut Down Debate.
You didn’t have to be Nostradamus to see it coming, but I’ll take credit for it anyway. When Mayors Against Illegal Guns announced they’d be holding rallies in eight states Mother’s Day weekend, I wrote, “Expect armed goons to show up to at least one of these, because if there’s anything the gun nuts really lack, it’s class and a nose for good PR.” Lo and behold, at a rally in Pennsylvania, said goons showed up.PhillyBurbs.com: As victims of gun violence spoke about how universal background checks might have saved a loved one’s life, pro-gun supporters jeered and yelled remarks Saturday in Morrisville’s Williamson Park.
Steve Kesselman of Holland raised his voice above the crowd to briefly talk about the loss of his 20-year-old son from a deadly shotgun blast after an argument last year.
“My son is dead! His mother cannot enjoy him anymore because of gun violence! Universal background checks is all we’re looking for. I have nothing against guns!” Kesselman yelled into the microphone.
“Do you believe in unicorns?!” a pro-gun supporter yelled from the crowd.
“Gun owners from groups such as Concerned Gun Owners of Bucks County, the National Rifle Association and a New Jersey group called the NJ2As gathered at Williamson Park before the marchers arrived,” according to the report. “Many wore guns and rifles.”
“I think it’s ridiculous the way they’ve been acting. I’m so numb to the idiots out there,” Kesselman said of the armed counter-protesters.
I don’t want to refer to my own writing on the subject too often, but I’ve been on a bit of a tear lately, so the info I’ve for previous posts is the info I have closest at hand. So I’m going to go ahead and refer back to a post from last week, where I argued that things like armed protests should be taken as open threats of violence on par with terrorism:So you’ve got people who hate government and want to kill tyrants. And these are the same people who see tyranny under every rock. Polling shows that nearly half of all Republican voters think armed revolution “might be necessary” in the near future. A reasonable person wouldn’t be out of line to wonder when all this tyrant-fighting was going to start and it wouldn’t be unreasonable to think it could be any second now. And when they hear about a terrorist attack with an unknown motive, it’s not unreasonable to wonder if maybe all this tyrant-killing has finally gotten under way.
When people argue that violence, murder, and assassination are legitimate political tools, brandishing firearms is meant to frighten people into silence. It’s bullying and, like all bullies, these bullies are cowards. Anyone who shouts in the face of a peaceful grandmother isn’t a model of courage. And anyone who heckles a father speaking about death of his son is not a paragon decorum. These people don’t want to have a debate. In fact, they’re so terrified of the discussion that they’ll show up with guns to try to shut it down. These people call themselves “patriots,” but they’re really just cowardly thugs. Courageous people don’t need to hide behind their weapons.
And they’re ineffective thugs, at that. They couldn’t shut down the rally in Morrisville and they won’t stop the growing movement to reduce gun violence, because the issue is way too important. It’s not going to get derailed by a bunch of tantrum-throwing toddlers afraid someone’s going to take away their binky. That importance was underscored the very next day, with a Mother’s Day mass shooting in New Orleans. Nineteen people were injured while attending a parade, when three men opened fire on the crowd. Two of the victims are children.
So wave your guns around and menace old ladies and jeer at grieving fathers all you want, gun nuts. We’re not going anywhere. Every time there’s a mass shooting or a dead kid, it strengthens our resolve. And if you feel the need to wave your guns around in a crowd of families and children, you’re just proving our point. We’re pretty convinced you shouldn’t be able to do that.
If you want to have a rational discussion about how to deal with gun violence, that’s fine. We may not agree on everything and may walk away as divided as we were before, but that’s the way it’s supposed to work. Democracy’s not supposed to be easy or comfortable all the time. But if your idea of “debate” is to stick a gun in someone’s face and tell them to shut up, then we don’t have a lot to talk about.
You’re nothing but a goon and you’re part of the problem.
[photo via PhillyBurbs.com]
Ever heard the saying, “Never bring your mouth to a gunfight”? Well, the reverse of that saying is also true. Never bring a gun to a mouth fight. If you show up armed to a debate, you’ve lost the debate. Period.
Don’t you wish you had your own Iron Man suit? We sure do. Thank you for seeing Iron Man 3 in theaters. Share this one proudly. It’s from our friends at Disney.
I don’t see you burning shit up in hollywood…I see you complaining on the internet…
why the fuck are you even following if you’re going to say things like this?
hollywood’s consumers are all over this site. that’s how this reaches hollywood.
With that logic, cosmopolitan and other “women magazine” would have changed.
“The last airbender” white trashed every single character of its whole universe and there is a sequel on the way, I don’t see how anyone changed anything about it.
I don’t deny the good intentions, but I’m looking at the results.
you think nobody went to the actual people who have done casting and or write for movies like that?
the problem is that they don’t give a shit, partially because their consumers don’t. these people don’t whitewash everything just because they want to. they also do so because it makes money, because consumers are obsessed with whiteness, so informing consumers helps as well.
I exist as proof, and as someone who hopes to work in the film industry, I will take it to Hollywood. Do you know how many other writers are potential casting directors are on this site? who will remember that whitewashing is wrong once they begin their work because of a simple blog post? do you really underestimate the power of tumblr so quickly?
So please, while you’re ahead, stop assuming that posts like this and many others just “remain” on the internet. You don’t know how many people take them and apply them to the offline world.
YOU have been affected in reality by messages like this. Whether you choose to take your knowledge and apply it to the outside world or stay inside and say people aren’t reaching anyone because they’re on the internet, is YOUR choice/fault.
Some people actually learn from things like this and take them elsewhere. Don’t assume everyone is so pessimistic and reluctant to talk about these things in their everyday lives like you.
It as this point in the conversation I like to bring up the Twilight Saga.
Stop rolling your eyes.
Despite it various faults and fails (of which there are so, so many), in this one area Twilight films did a lot right and even good.
The Twilight books feature white people and Native American people. Not much else.
In the films, there is more diversity. There are black students, Asian students, & Latin@ students. Moreover, all of the actors who portray Native American characters from the book are actually Native American or First Nations actors.
There is some dispute about Taylor Lautner’s heritage, but I’m not about to pay ancestry.com to figure that out.
The directors and casting agents for the Twilight films looked specifically for people who are Native American/First Nations to portray these characters and what do you know, they found actors for every single named role and then some.
So, I don’t want to hear about ‘Hollywood not paying attention’ or how they ‘went with the best actor for the role’ or how they ‘couldn’t find an actor of that ethnicity/race with the level of talent’ they desired. It’s bullshit. They know exactly what they’re doing. None of this is mistake or unhappy/unrealized accident.
Hollywood whitewashes damn near every story it puts out, but when it gets to a movie based on a book that essentially glorifies and showcases an abusive relationship, THAT’S when they start casting minorities.
You’re right. That wasn’t a mistake or an unhappy/unrealized accident.
New Earth. New Rules. Dive into the wild new world of 2046 and see St. Louis like you’ve never imagined. Arkfall is officially upon us! Will you grab the Hellbug by the horns or get lost in the rubble? Watch the Show. Play the Game. Change the World. Share this one proudly. It’s from our friends at SyFy.
Rebranding Failing Because GOP Doesn’t Do Listening.
So, Republicans are now in the midst of their big rebranding effort that includes outreach to minority and female voters. Frankly, the woman voter outreach is going pretty lousy, because they’re doing it all wrong. You don’t take away people’s freedoms then ask them to reward you for it at the ballot box. If the GOP wants to win over women, it might be a good idea to stop with all the War on Women stuff.
But there’s always the minority outreach. Let’s see how that’s going…Washington Post:
Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), in an interview with a local radio station released Thursday, referred to Latinos working on a ranch by using the derogatory term “wetbacks.”
“My father had a ranch. We used to hire 50 or 60 wetbacks and — to pick tomatoes,” Young said in the interview with KRBD. “You know, it takes two people to pick the same tomatoes now. It’s all done by machine.”
The term “wetback” is a slur often used to refer to illegal Mexican immigrants. Merriam-Webster defines it as “a Mexican who enters the United States illegally,” “from the practice of wading or swimming the Rio Grande where it forms the U.S.-Mexico border.”
OK, so that’s not doing it right either. Young later released what some are calling an apology, but is really just an explanation. There is no apology. “I used a term that was commonly used during my days growing up on a farm in central California,” he said. “I know that this term is not used in the same way nowadays and I meant no disrespect.”
In other words, “You’re wrong to be offended by what I said.”
“Just so we’re clear, it’s 2013,” Steve Benen reminds us. “Republicans were recently reminded not to use words like ‘aliens’ and ‘anchor babies’ when referring to Hispanics, but apparently that advice was not all-encompassing enough, since we still have at least one congressman using the word ‘wetback’ — on the air — as if it were perfectly acceptable.”
This comes on the heels of a Republican National Committeeman posting a homophobic screed on his Facebook page. And the committeeman, Dave Agema, isn’t apologetic. He likewise released a statement of explanation, claiming to be the victim of harassment and playing the Helen Lovejoy “Won’t somebody please think of the children!?” card, saying someone has to post these hateful lies, because “It’s about maintaining the family and its importance to the well being of the children and this nation.”
“And here’s the problem with the wise, beltway-driven Rebranding effort,” writes Dave Weigel. “You’re a D.C. Republican consultant who gets booked on TV to talk about the glories of gay marriage? Good for you. I agree with you! But most of your party adamantly disagrees with you, and these people know how to write or say things that can make their way onto the Internet.”
Reince Priebus may think the GOP needs to change it’s image, but other than saying maybe they might possibly give an inch someday on immigration reform, no one seems willing to actually change anything. They don’t want to change their policies, they don’t want to change their language, they don’t want to change anything. They’ve just decided to declare themselves friendlier to people they so far haven’t removed from their enemies list. “No abortions or birth control for you, you whore!… Now vote for me because I’m pro-woman.”
You can’t change the perception without changing the party — and people who think they can change the party need to check the dictionary and see what “conservative” means. It doesn’t mean open to change. In fact, I always say that when a Republican talks about change, you should watch out — it means he wants to change things back the way they were when they sucked. The party doesn’t look to the future, it looks back at the fifties and wonders why we changed from that.
The perception of the party won’t change until the party members change. And they’re not willing to do that. In fact, most are probably incapable of doing that. And incidents like Young’s keep happening because of another conservative trait: they’re lecturers. They don’t listen, the dictate. It’s why these Republicans keep saying stupid and offense things — then explain why they aren’t gaffes, instead of apologizing. The GOP is a strict, top-down hierarchy where elites tell everyone below them what to think. Why do you think talk radio works so well for the right? They don’t think they have to change, they think you have to change. They’ll explain why you have to change until you do. Todd Akin thought he was winning voters to the Republican cause by educating them about rape and abortion. And take a look at Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson — all he ever talks about is how wrong everyone else is and how they need to listen to his teachings and become enlightened. Republicans tell, they aren’t told. Not by voters, anyway.
And not, apparently, by Reince Priebus and the RNC.
[original photo by MACSwriter]
By Andrew Wheeler and Joseph Hughes
Uncanny Avengers #5 was mostly a strong issue, the best of the series so far, in part because it gave readers the clearest sense of the team’s dynamic and purpose, and in part because the guest art from Olivier Coipel was exceptional. Yet there was one part of the issue that didn’t hit its mark.
Uncanny Avengers #5 features the formal unveiling of the Avengers Unity Team, the public name of the book’s Avengers/X-Men mash-up roster. As part of the big reveal to the press, team leader Havok gave a little speech. And in that little speech he shredded the central thesis of minority identity politics. And that is a problem.
The pertinent section of the speech, by series writer Rick Remender, reads as follows: “I don’t see myself as born into a mutant cult or religion. Having an X-gene doesn’t bond me to anyone. It doesn’t define me. In fact, I see the very word “mutant” as divisive. Old thinking that serves to further separate us from our fellow man. We are all humans. Of one tribe. We are defined by our choices, not the makeup of our genes. So please, don’t call us mutants. The “m” word represents everything I hate.”
One can see the outline of good intentions in that speech. The fight for equality is predicated on the idea that our differences should not divide us. Minorities should not be defined by difference, and equal rights and opportunities should include freedom from the expectation that one will think or act a certain way based on one’s minority identity.
On Formspring, Uncanny Avengers editor Tom Brevoort suggested this reading; “I think that the point of Havok’s speech is that people aren’t all just one thing, and need not be defined by one aspect of who they are.” Others have framed the speech in similar terms; “How can anyone argue against someone wanting to be identified as a human being first? It’s a message of inclusion.” Remender himself said that Havok is “trying to make people stop seeing a ‘mutant’ and start seeing a ‘person.’”
All of which is admirable, but that’s not actually the speech Havok gave. Havok’s speech makes a huge leap from, “my minority identity doesn’t define me” to a rejection of minority identity. Havok is a mutant, but he says the word is divisive and that it represents everything he hates. He asks people not to use it. He is, definitively and explicitly, self-loathing about his identity.