FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
No bio...
User ID: 157
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
How many times have you been told you don't get to just start cursing people out because you're offended?
When it comes to denying the facts of what KILLED MY MOTHER, I think we're past "being offended" and into "if you said that to my face, you'd get punched in the mouth" territory.
Hit me with a ban and let him continue shit-posting. I don't care at this stage. But he/she/it/they are a fucking liar and I won't eat dogshit and call it chocolate, all in the name of "play nicely, children".
It's almost funny, to see how from the above how I could skirt around a ban on a technicality of "we're not quite sure you're a troll, so we'll keep on letting you shit-post". But on this one topic I am not going to be sweet and calm.
This is about "this thing kills people". I already see young people going back to the notion that tobacco smoking is cool and edgy and trendy. At least some of them will develop a smoking habit, and at least some of them will die from that. And die painful, miserable, awful deaths.
So pardon me if I tread on Sky's toes and their oh-so-edgy "it's all propaganda", while I have a grave of someone who died from not-propaganda to visit.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
6mo ago
First, I am going to be very interested to hear why the mods are not telling you "move this to the Sunday question thread".
Second, if she's living and working in California, why is she still registered to vote in Maryland? Family home is back there? Legal address? Tax reasons?
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
7mo ago
God Almighty, Sloot, reading your view of what women are like and why won't the bitches just open their legs for any guy without strings attached except and until the guy wants to marry a virgin after he's had his fun, it makes me want to introduce mandatory castration for all men, and I generally like men. I want them to be romantically and sexually successful! I want those who want romantic relationships to be able to have them!
What the fuck is it about sex that makes humans crazy?
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
10mo ago
some racial slave morality bent
My God, Americans really are ignorant. Remind me why the fuck I ever came back here.
Please note: the entire rest of the world is not the same as your crabbed little polarised wars. "Whitey so great!!" chest-beating like this isn't yet part of our discourse, even given the best efforts of the type of actual white supremacist losers to export it to my country from both the USA and the UK.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
You call yourself a "rat", so take the beam out of your own eye first. "Rat" as a 'cutesy' nickname for "rationalists" isn't cute, funny or clever. Adopt a less insulting moniker (because the general usage of calling someone a "rat" is meant to be insulting and derogatory) and then come back to finger-wag about "name calling".
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
So do you think we would be better with a complete break between the idea of relationships and the idea of what it really comes down to - the feminist critique of marriage being "exchanging sex for meat"? Men and women are all perceived as economic factors, and if men want sex they don't bother with dates or relationships, they patronise sex workers where the transaction is overt and there is no confusion about who does what or pays for what. If the expectation is "the man buys dinner, the woman pays him back with sex", then dump all that and just "the man is horny, he buys a sex worker for however long, no hurt expectations or mismatches".
Women have their own thing, they enjoy working and status that way. Everybody knows their position and role. If marriage is still considered a necessary thing, back to the old days of families making alliances without emotional entanglements. But why is marriage necessary? If society wants children, the stigma around single motherhood is gone, and perhaps we'll get the artificial wombs and IVF babies gestated in them and brought up by government creches.
Because reading all the screeds about "it's so unfair! women have all the power! they should lose all their rights and be forced back to the days of exchanging sex for meat so that men can have a fuckdoll of their own at home for their own exclusive use!" makes me wonder why women would want to get married in the first place.
Hello! Today, on "Fucking Stupid Politics", here's a peach, a pippin, a doozy of an example.
'Why is peepul thinking we wuz talkin' 'bout killin' peepul? Y they not get de IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL CLIMATE CHANGE FIGHTIN' POINT?'
Because you idiots made it about "killing", "taking out", "terrorists", etc. That is why people are discussing the ethics of murder and not your BIG IMPORTANT POINT.
These are the same people who would lip-wibble over "speech is violence". Imagine I did a graphic about "this is the harm reduction we could ensure by killing just one trans activist". Do you think they'd be all "Well Chauncey, that is an interesting rhetorical device to illustrate your thesis"? No, they'd be screaming about hate speech, death threats, inciting violence, and demanding not alone banning from all online media but the police to get involved.
And this is why they are shooting themselves in the foot over such campaigns. Never mind that if right this minute all fossil fuel extraction and production stopped, and we only had renewables and limited nuclear power to rely on. Our entire global civilisation would be in a lot of trouble because we haven't yet solved the transition problems.
The notes are getting hung up on how the carbon offset for killing an oil executive was calculated, and y'all, it's not supposed to be an accurate calculation of exactly what would happen if you killed an oil executive, it's meant to highlight just how unbelievably vast the environmental impact of the bigwigs at BP or Exxon is compared to yours, and ultimately how the planet is being knowingly and purposefully killed by a small handful of uber wealthy individuals.
No, let's keep discussing ethics. They could use a stern course of Aquinas. Even BP oil execs do not get up in the morning and go "Today I think I shall be Evil. Let me knowingly and purposefully kill the planet!" (Moustache twirling, evil laughter and gleeful hand rubbing optional).
Those guys are trying to make a living, provide a service, and sell goods. Yes, increase the profits of their company. Yes, get rich. Yes, all that. But that only happens because the entire world pretty much runs on oil. Up until the mid-19th century, petroleum deposits were useless or even seen as devaluing land if you had a lake of thick black goop slopping out of the ground. Ironically, petroleum could be seen as the environmentally friendly option, given that it replaced whale oil (due to the dwindling population of whales that were being hunted to provide oil). And so our industrial civilisation was built around it.
You can't slam the brakes on all of a sudden to move from fossil fuels to other sources. And the dumb stupid "punch a Nazi" lazy 'we're fighting a war here and we're the soldiers in the army of right' tropes on display here about "killing" people just for the job they do don't help. This is why ordinary people think the Just Stop Oil etc. campaigns are damn stupid.
Because they are.
EDIT: Ah feck it, while I'm being ranty anyway: this is instructive to compare to what I'm seeing about "Trump's 'we're coming for you' tweet is being investigated" as presumably incitement to violence and death and treason and coup and the rest of it. I was already thinking about "I'm sure you can find plenty of examples of political speeches and speeches by police commissioners and DAs and so forth about 'coming after/coming for/look out you're next' political opponents, crime, etc." so singling out this as a unique example of "no it's a definite threat of physical harm" seems to be leaning heavily on the scales.
The same way the Gabby Giffords assassination attempt was portrayed as "the Republicans with their target crosshairs poster set her up for this", never mind that people found examples of Democratic politicians also using targets/crosshairs in similar statements.
And now this: 'if we talk about killing someone, you should understand it only means 'if there were one fewer oil exec in a job' but if you use languatge like that, you really do mean to kill/harm your opponents' perfect example of one law for me and another law for thee.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
It's pretty clear what Alexandria was saying
Seeing as how you can't even get the guy's name right, it's rich of you to blame Scott for not being able to repeat arguments.
While this is very scholarly, upon reflection let me say:
Fuck you.
My late mother smoked pretty much all her life, tried and failed to stop smoking various times, and over the years I could see that the amount she smoked increased. She tried switching to low-tar cigarettes, but ending up smoking way more of them, presumably to get the same effect. EDIT: My father, on the other hand, smoked but succeeded in quitting and lived to be 81 before he died of an unrelated illness.
Eventually she got lung cancer. It was diagnosed very late, partly as a result of her reluctance to go to the doctor until the symptoms were undeniable (coughing up black phlegm in the mornings) and partly because the tumour was behind her shoulder blade so they didn't pick it up on x-rays until it was too big and too late for anything.
They offered her chemotherapy as more of a sop than any hope it would do anything; the first bout of it made her so sick that she refused any more, and the doctors said "yeah, it wouldn't do anything anyway".
I saw her die of it. It is a horrible, painful, wretched way to die, even with morphine as a palliative.
So maybe, yeah, maybe it's all propaganda that tobacco gives you cancer. But if some fool reads this, and starts smoking, and gets cancer, that is a miserable and avoidable death.
So, once again, Fuck. You.
And don't try to tell me she didn't die of lung cancer or that the smoking didn't cause it or any bullshit. Like your stupid-ass example of "if someone is killed in a car crash, it's not because they smoked so that shouldn't be counted as tobacco-related death" - who the fuck is counting "died in a car crash" as "died from smoking"?
it is impossible for a pathologist to determine, from both gross and microscopic examination of lung tissue, whether a person who died from other causes (such as a vehicular accident) is a smoker or a non-smoker.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
4mo ago
If they object to holiday displays, then they should be going around shopping malls demanding the Santas and Christmas trees be taken down. It's that they're sticking their tongues out, like primary school kids, at specifically Christian festival is the major pain in the backside. I'm not impressed, and honestly I think it makes them look like wet blankets rather than Kewl Edgy types, but eh. If they have nothing more meaningful in their lives to be getting on with than trying to shock their grannies, I feel sorry for them (I may be a pathetic loser, but I'm not going around trying to construct maximally offensive to atheists rip-off imagery in public spaces).
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
The Nazis did many bad things but that doesn't mean everything they did was bad.
Please do not try to steelman Nazi eugenics programmes. Please. Otherwise you will make yourself sound like "Yeah, Hitler went a bit too far, but he was basically right about the Jewish Question".
The Nazis were not doing nice respectable quiet science. They were doing bad shit. They wanted to kill off people, and they did. And depending on your circumstances, to them you might be one of the 'lives undeserving of life' or 'natural slave race meant to serve us'.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
5mo ago
okay, sweetie
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
6mo ago
Because it's not Culture War, or that's what I was told about asking who was likely to succeed Feinstein.
Oooh baby, did I hurt your precious fee-fees?
Since that seems to be the level we are now operating at. I'm single and childless by choice (and circumstance, a lot more circumstance than choice) and although I don't owe you bozos an explanation, it's because I would be a terrible parent and my family genetics are too shit to inflict on a new generation. I don't give a fuck about my chromosomes, except as part of my shitty genetic heritage. Were I a man, I'd be the same if women were writing about how men were all cockhounds who don't want to settle down to be responsible citizens, husbands and fathers until they're worn out and shagged out and think a much younger woman is a magic elixir to rejuvenate them - they're wrong and unless they have skin in the game, shut up.
That's partly why I don't appreciate a bunch of childless guys telling me and other women that there's a fertility crisis and it's all our fault, men - the innocent little lambs - have nothing to do with it. So yeah, I damn well am going to say "Okay, if you're out there judging women for 'riding the cock carousel', what have you done to address the problem? Are you a husband and father? If not, why not?"
Shut up unless you have skin in the game. I'm Catholic. We're officially anti-contraception, anti-abortion, and anti-fornication. And I think the remedies suggested by some on here are stupid to the point of being indistinguishable from the Taliban. If the likes of me are saying "Cool it guys" due to sounding like that, consider you might be going a tiny bit too far.
"Bitches ain't shit crowd"? Excuse me while I laugh. You have no goddamn idea the level of misanthropic loathing I have for the rest of humanity, and I freely include myself in the "ain't shit" category. If you honestly think my ox or any cow, bullock or calf has been gored, you are living down to your user name.
Or did you not know what Amadán means as Gaeilge?
as I usually ignore your explosions when you are re-reminded that the "bitches ain't shit" crowd you like to hang with as long as they are dunking on wokes includes you in that category
Ignore away, little man. I don't care a straw for your opinion of me.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
Please do not use meaningless insulting terms like TERF. It just tempts me to use insulting terms about you.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
I'm not a utilitarian, libertarian, or marxist, so your arguments do not convince me.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
If not, then please explain why it's different for you.
It's not. Your house, your rules, and I knew what I was getting into when I signed up.
I like The Motte, I like (most of) you, I like the principles behind this place, I like what you are trying to do. And I do believe in free speech, so I'm not asking for bans or demanding this place is run how I want it/like it or, worst of all, issuing ultimatums along the lines of "him or me, choose!"
I've mocked people for flouncing off, so consider this karma or just retribution or what you will. Whether we call it the Wheel of the Law or the Wheel of Fortune, it turns inexorably and inescapably and we are all bound to it.
Do you believe someone personally affronted by any of those themes (like, say, by being Jewish, or black, or trans, or a leftist) would be justified in throwing fuck yous at the OP and ignoring our discourse rules?
Yes. See "committed to free speech" above. Sky is perfectly entitled to tell me go fuck myself if offended by what I said to them. I realise the mods don't want this place to degenerate into exchanges of insults, but sometimes "fuck you" is the bon mot.
You know how it is, so please stop acting the martyr when you very deliberately break the rules.
"Acting the martyr"? Maybe that is indeed what I'm doing. But you, Amadan, said to me that "you don't get to just start cursing people out because you're offended".
I wish to God I was only "offended". That would be so much easier and less painful. I'm not offended, Amadan, I'm flayed raw. It's been ten years since my mother's death, and it still hurts to think of it.
So to hell with it, if I'm playing the martyr, let me play it to the hilt.
She was diagnosed in February and dead by June. She died hard, and fearfully. She said to me "I don't want to die", but what could I say? This was fatal, we all knew it. Over that period of five months, she went from an active woman to a wizened, aged thing that could barely sit upright in a chair. She hated hospitals, so we kept her at home as long as we could.
Morphine patches helped, but when they were sufficient to keep the pain down (not gone, just down), they left her groggy and limp-muscled, and rendered her doubly incontinent because she wasn't able to alert us in time or get out of her bed to use toilet facilities. As you can imagine, this was humiliating for a woman who had always been private and independent.
When we cut back on the medication so she was more with-it, the pain was unbearable. I don't know if you've had to listen to someone moaning and whimpering in pain for hours while you're desperately applying morphine patches and hoping they'll build up fast again in her blood stream, while waiting for the ambulance to come and take her into hospital for the final days she has left.
Oh, and talking of hospitals: because it was so urgent, she was taken in by our shitty local hospital instead of the regional hospital. We were warned about this, but we knew it already: the matron had a reputation for stealing from the patients, so my sister took off my mother's wedding ring and kept it safe.
Imagine that: having to take the wedding ring off a dying woman's finger because the medical staff will rob her corpse.
Well, the end wasn't long after she went in; they had her on pain control, so she was semi-conscious at best, and unaware of where she was, what was happening, and so on. She lasted a day or so and then the end, which by then was a mercy.
Is that enough "playing" for you, Amadan?
So this shit-for-brains comes to piss on my mother's grave, and I yell at him, and you grab me by the elbow to rebuke me. Heaven forfend I use harsh language to someone pissing on my mother's corpse!
I am genuinely sorry not to be able to comply with your requirements, but I also genuinely cannot.
However. Your house, your rules. I don't need to be here, and you don't need me to be here. At the end, I'm here for entertainment and fun. When it stops being fun, time to go. I wish all of you the best and success in your endeavours, guys and gals and those of you what ain't too sure. I'm not flouncing out because I'm too dispirited to flounce, let's say I'm slinking away.
And you are all completely, positively, absolutely entitled to mock me for flouncing/slinking off when I got my knuckles rapped.
Good night, good luck, and good bye to you all. Let's have one for the road, the deoch an dorais.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1mo ago
Well, let's dig in to this. "Less attractive" by what metric? Why should they be attractive in the first place? Are the men ranked on being attractive? I mean yeah, Chris Evans Captain America whoo-hoo baby, but the general run of video game male first person characters?
It's a stupid fight and I don't want to get in to it. If guys want doll characters in high heels, fishnets and plunging cleavage bashing people's brains in with baseball bats, well... you do you. But it's not any realistic level of 'attractiveness'.
Here's the less attractive version of Harley Quinn, right? Oh my gosh, the new version doesn't have her arse swinging like a pendulum, this is an affront!
It's a silly thing to get worked up over. Guys want the exaggerated boobs'n'butt, sure, let them have it. But it's not "less attractive versus more attractive", it's porn attractive.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
3mo ago
These are all distinctly male or male adjacent renditions of intelligence. Even within the more gender equal ones (wordcel or artist), I specifically define them to highlight a sub-group that tends to be majority male. Other than a few unicorns, the women who display these aforementioned types of intelligence are often tomboys or awkward wierdos.
There's an entire slap-fight waiting there for you, but I'm not inclined to get into it, just rather sit back and watch you get smacked about (probably not on here, it is majority guy as you say).
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
8mo ago
Damn it, this is what is driving me mad about this stupid, stupid poll. It's the moral choice. It's the only correct answer. It's the pro-social choice.
Well, it must be lovely to be so sure of your impeccable, immaculate souls with no stains on them and no need for anyone else to ever help you because you constantly do the right thing of your own accord and so can afford to play Lady Bountiful for the idiot school inmates who need to be saved from their own bad choices. I'll be down here crying "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner!" with the rest of the red pills.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
10mo ago
they believe their existence on earth is to secure the Jewish People and a future for Jewish children
Nice veiled reference there, very subtly done, ha ha you are so clever to link Fascism and Zionism!
Look, if we hadn't had a war within (just about) living memory over a damn good attempt to wipe out the Jewish People and Jewish children, you'd have a point. But given that the extirpation of European Jewry (and any where else they could manage to conquer) was indeed an aim of the Nazi party, there is some grounds for forbearance on "let's encourage our people to have babies".
I mean, haven't we already had plenty of posts and comments on here about "so the fertility rate in the West is dropping like a stone, how do we encourage women to have babies"? Should such commentary be free from criticism, given that they want to ensure white birth rate goes up?
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
Men's marriage standards are "teenage virgin".
With DD boobs and who is a slut whore who will perform any sexual act he asks for, at the same time as being a teenage virgin. There are unrealistic expectations on both sides.
FarNearEverywhere
undereducated and overopinionated
1yr ago
If I generate photo-realistic CP of a child who does not actually exist, is that a crime?
I'm going to bite that bullet and say 'yes'. The defence there is "but it's not a real child". However, the impetus is "I want to fuck a real child, but since I can't do that without being thrown in jail, this is the next-best thing". Or else "I don't want to fuck kids, but I'm happy to produce art for the sickos who do and take their money".
Since the consumer of child porn most likely would fuck a child if they could manage it, then that is indicative of desire to commit a crime (as for all the MAPs who are "but I don't want to do anything to a real child, I'm just romantically/sexually attracted without that being my will", if you're consuming child porn, yeah that argument doesn't hold too much water). Getting child porn of real children being raped and abused is not a victimless crime. Moving it one step up, 'this is photo-realistic so it looks like a real child but is computer-generated' is only a fig leaf. Since you can't fuck a kid without getting into trouble, and you can't have porn of real kids being really fucked without getting in trouble, you're settling for the next best thing.
Is it always females and males you discourse with, or do you ever talk to women and men? Or is that only for us ordinary types who don't know nuthin' 'bout no smart person stuff, Miz Scarlett?
EDIT: Apologies, it may be down to English as a second language that you use "females and males", I see that you do use "women" further down. But using "I speak to males" sounds like a bad attempt at a social science experiment, not how people generally conduct themselves in ordinary life.
More options
Context Copy link