Fully Baked Left Wing Vegan Cookies

silverharp

another in the series of strange things feminist "academics" worry about :pac:

New Real Peer Review ‏@RealPeerReview 14m14 minutes ago
Maybe because it isn't? Just a thought http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-24549-9_2 …

recedite

Lefty French organisation Reporters Sans Frontiéres has given an award to a jihadi who reports from the fundamentalist front lines.

Check out the two videos in the link. In the first he nearly wets himself with glee filming the captured booty which Allah has bestowed upon him and his mates.
In the second he taunts some Syrian regular army soldiers trapped and dying under rubble, gloating over their predicament.
Absolutely disgusting.

And of course, the kind of cookies who grant these awards would be the first to the slaughter if the jihadists got their way.

FA Hayek

I think this thread is going to be very busy over the next few weeks.

Gbear

FA Hayek wrote: »

I think this thread is going to be very busy over the next few weeks.

And it's sister-thread, over the next 4 years.

FA Hayek

Yes, and both will be examples for future historians on why the likes of Trump has won.

ivytwine

Honestly if some of the discourse around this election showed anything, it is that there is still work to do on how women are perceived and related to. But feminism has spent the last decade tearing itself apart over the stupidest of **** that I'm pessimistic about any unity over the issues that still ****ing matter.
Like. Argue argue argue about if a pop song is rape culture (I'm beginning to dislike that phrase intensely) or that some women want to sleep with men (stay the HELL out of my bedroom) but ignore the fact that services for rape victims are skeletal and being pared back even further year on year.
/rant

recedite

ivytwine wrote: »

rape culture

Rape? I think its supposed to be referred to as a "sexual emergency" these days.

ivytwine

recedite wrote: »

Rape? I think its supposed to be referred to as a "sexual emergency" these days.

I wish I hadn't clicked that link.

silverharp

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3922344/Boston-schools-offer-counselling-students-Trump-s-win.html

Schools in Boston have offered counselling to students while universities across the country are offering meditation sessions and free tea to help those struggling after Donald Trump's election victory.
A letter was sent to parents and students at public schools in Boston on Wednesday saying counselors were available to anyone who has concerns after Tuesday's election.
Boston Superintendent Tommy Chang said in the letter that resources were available and that it was important to be strong for the students.

recedite

The problem with these people is that they convinced themselves that Trump was a bad monster and for them the election became a struggle of Good V Evil.
Now it seems to them that Evil has triumphed and the End of the World is nigh. They'll cop on to themselves soon enough, when nothing bad actually happens.

ivytwine

recedite wrote: »

The problem with these people is that they convinced themselves that Trump was a bad monster and for them the election became a struggle of Good V Evil.
Now it seems to them that Evil has triumphed and the End of the World is nigh. They'll cop on to themselves soon enough, when nothing bad actually happens.

Pence worries me far more than Trump tbh.

What (for want of a better term) the left needs now is calm heads, unity, rationality and the strength to wade into nasty debates and engage with people it doesn't agree with. Old fashioned things.

There are people calling for this, and the usual people are like I DON'T HAVE TO ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE WHO HATE BLACK PEOPLE/LGBT PEOPLE/WOMEN!

Yes you do. Because if you don't debate with people and make them see our common shared humanity, if you call all Trump voters idiots etc, that's how you get President Trump.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

The problem with these people is that they convinced themselves that Trump was a bad monster and for them the election became a struggle of Good V Evil.

Perhaps you could let us know how we can best appreciate a deceitful, uneducated, demagogic, racist fraudster and conspiracy theorist who boasts about sexual predation?

robindch

ivytwine wrote: »

Because if you don't debate with people and make them see our common shared humanity, if you call all Trump voters idiots etc, that's how you get President Trump.

That's one of the lines which DT and his compliant media outlets has spun successfully, but to a large extent, that's not what happened - the vast majority of negative commentary has been about DT himself, not about the people who are consuming his incendiary output.

FA Hayek

recedite wrote: »

The problem with these people is that they convinced themselves that Trump was a bad monster and for them the election became a struggle of Good V Evil.
Now it seems to them that Evil has triumphed and the End of the World is nigh. They'll cop on to themselves soon enough, when nothing bad actually happens.

Yes, the reaction to Trump winning has been spectacularly both pathetic and hilarious. Like, I am no fan of the guy, he is both brilliant and flawed but do the Democrats or the left of that country or indeed the world have no shame? Do they have any backbone at all?

ivytwine

robindch wrote: »

That's one of the lines which DT and his compliant media outlets has spun successfully, but to a large extent, that's not what happened - the vast majority of negative commentary has been about DT himself, not about the people who are consuming his incendiary output.

To clarify, I'm not suggesting that we all go singing Kumbaya at the KKK or anything like that. There are some very very disturbing elements among Trump's base and no, those should not be pandered to.

There was a lot of negative commentary on his supporters, whether in the media, or by individuals on social media. And not all the media, but enough of it, tried to analyse his support as if the people who made him president were exotic and slightly stupid animals. This thread is full of examples of how intolerant the left has become. This is ongoing.

Look I'm socially liberal, but I don't like this sort of "ugh X thinks Y so they're complete trash" which has become so common. My father, for example, was a homophobe who ended up voting yes in the referendum last year. Certainly not because someone called him trash, but because he got to know gay people, and he was respected and debated with like an adult.

FA Hayek

Oh goody, another one from the Guardian.

My six-year-old fell asleep thinking Hillary Clinton would be the first female president. Now I have to explain to her why Donald Trump was chosen instead

I know that I’ll find the right words to relay the gravity of the election to my daughter without scaring her. I have confidence in that. Her father and I will tell her that sometimes people make bad decisions, and that the wrong people are chosen to lead.

She treats it like a death in the family. Very close to the line of 'Bad things happen to good people because God has a plan'. I would imagine her six year old will go right back to her life, oblivious to what really happened. Also, shows how little faith she has in her residency of her daughter. Shame to be honest.

Then we have this beaut from her a few days ago, which perfectly represents why people have rejected her ideology.

http://heatst.com/culture-wars/jessica-valenti-clintons-victory-will-unleash-mansplaining-by-mediocre-dudes/

The Guardian feminist columnist Jessica Valenti thinks Hillary Clinton’s victory on Tuesday will unleash a wave of “mansplaining” by “mediocre dudes” telling her how she “should actually run the country”. Because, of course, that has never happened to a male president.

On Monday, she tweeted: “My friend has a theory: If Clinton gets elected, mansplaining is going to go through the roof. I think she’s right”, adding “Like some sort of anxious masculinity overload”.

Shooting fish in a barrel.

Interestingly, no comments allowed on Jessica's opinion piece on the Guardian, differing opinions from the narrative not allowed of course. They, the ivory tower class get to tell you what to think, and then they ask you to donate to the paper? It is no wonder the paper is struggling financially with columnists like Jessica on the payroll.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Perhaps you could let us know how we can best appreciate a deceitful, uneducated, demagogic, racist fraudster and conspiracy theorist who boasts about sexual predation?

Like everyone else, he has his flaws. His are very easy to uncover because he has spent his entire life in the limelight. And unlike Hillary, he is not a "political" animal in the sense of carefully preparing a face to meet the people that you meet. So he has been careless, in leaving behind a trail of evidence that can be dug up and used against him.

I wont be able to rid you of your predudices and preconceptions at this stage. Just wait and see what happens over the next few years. If the world ends, you can mutter "I was right" as the lights go out.

If the world improves, don't forget to come back here and eat humble pie

FA Hayek

ivytwine wrote: »

This thread is full of examples of how intolerant the left has become. This is ongoing.

.

Never mind this thread, you can also check out the other thread and see the absolute contempt some regular posters view American voters.

ivytwine

FA Hayek wrote: »

Oh goody, another one from the Guardian.





She treats it like a death in the family. Very close to the line of 'Bad things happen to good people because God has a plan'. I would imagine her six year old will go right back to her life, oblivious to what really happened. Also, shows how little faith she has in her residency of her daughter. Shame to be honest.

Then we have this beaut from her a few days ago, which perfectly represents why people have rejected her ideology.

http://heatst.com/culture-wars/jessica-valenti-clintons-victory-will-unleash-mansplaining-by-mediocre-dudes/



Shooting fish in a barrel.

Interestingly, no comments allowed on Jessica's opinion piece on the Guardian, differing opinions from the narrative not allowed of course. They, the ivory tower class get to tell you what to think, and then they ask you to donate to the paper? It is no wonder the paper is struggling financially with columnists like Jessica on the payroll.

When I was six I saw the skulls of the victims of the Rwandan genocide on the news. I was 7 and I heard about Dunblane. I was 9 and I vividly, vividly remember Omagh. Good things for a small kid to see or hear? Probably not. Probably vital in teaching me that there are bad people but good people can effect change if they're strong enough. The world can be bad. Teach kids that and teach them to be good.

recedite

The Guarjan article is a prime example alright

....the man who brags about hurting people and separating families – will lead her nation.

and then, without a trace of irony....

I have always been worried about the things I will pass down to my daughter

Reminds me of those kids you occasionally find that are terrified of a sleeping dog, for no apparent reason.
Then one one day you see the kid with their parent, and the parent snatches them up whenever they see a dog within a 20 metre radius, as if they were saving the child from an imminent attack. Ask them if they have ever been bitten by a dog... "No, I've never been close enough to let it happen."

robindch

ivytwine wrote: »

Look I'm socially liberal, but I don't like this sort of "ugh X thinks Y so they're complete trash" which has become so common.

Trash? "Stupid" yes, but trash? Can't say I've seen much commentary at that crazy level against DT (though plenty from DT and his supporters. It's certainly nothing like as widespread as DT and his compliant media outlets make out - it's to the benefit of both, after all, that both play up this "Group X says that DT supporters are thick" line, without quantifying anything. FA Hayek's output in this thread for example is a good example - full of righteous anger against some group called "the left" backed by little more than hot air and the occasional Guardian article.

And regardless of whether people do say "X thinks Y so they're stupid" (note, not "trash"), is some conclusion like 'stupid' based upon a political position which *can* be changed, commensurate with broad insults like those from DT and his media against something like skin color or national origin, which cannot be changed?

ivytwine wrote: »

My father, for example, was a homophobe who ended up voting yes in the referendum last year. Certainly not because someone called him trash, but because he got to know gay people, and he was respected and debated with like an adult.

I agree entirely that the debate should be respectful, but DT and his media outlets ran the most disrespectful, insulting campaign I've ever seen - it really was revolting and way, way in excess of any of the responses to the original disrespect. And where disrespect was generated against DT, his media outlets and his supporters, it was overwhelmingly directed at DT alone.

recedite

recedite wrote: »

Like everyone else, he has his flaws. His are very easy to uncover because he has spent his entire life in the limelight. And unlike Hillary, he is not a "political" animal in the sense of carefully preparing a face to meet the people that you meet. So he has been careless, in leaving behind a trail of evidence that can be dug up and used against him.

I wont be able to rid you of your predudices and preconceptions at this stage. Just wait and see what happens over the next few years. If the world ends, you can mutter "I was right" as the lights go out.

If the world improves, don't forget to come back here and eat humble pie

Sounds very religiony. Almost ISIS esque.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

I wont be able to rid you of your predudices and preconceptions at this stage.

I'm a bit fascinated by comments, indeed entire posts, like this - do you genuinely believe that a comment like "DT is a deceitful, conspiracy theorist" is, somehow, a "preconception"? Do you know what the word means?

You're aware that "deceitful, conspiracy theorist" is a conclusion based upon birther conspiracy theories which DT has been raving about for years and not a "preconception"?

You seem to me mixing up the way these things work - it's not wise to choose a conclusion first then look for compliant data. Much better to look at the data, then draw some conclusions from it.

FA Hayek

recedite wrote: »

The Guarjan article is a prime example alright

and then, without a trace of irony....

Reminds me of those kids you occasionally find that are terrified of a sleeping dog, for no apparent reason.
Then one one day you see the kid with their parent, and the parent snatches them up whenever they see a dog within a 20 metre radius, as if they were saving the child from an imminent attack. Ask them if they have ever been bitten by a dog... "No, I've never been close enough to let it happen."

You know what is going to happen right. The kid will grow up to be an arch conservative, just to piss off her parents. Jessica will write a tearful blog blaming the patriarchy for the outcome.

ivytwine

robindch wrote: »

Trash? "Stupid" yes, but trash? Can't say I've seen much commentary at that crazy level against DT (though plenty from DT and his supporters. It's certainly nothing like as widespread as DT and his compliant media outlets make out - it's to the benefit of both, after all, that both play up this "Group X says that DT supporters are thick" line, without quantifying anything. FA Hayek's output in this thread for example is a good example - full of righteous anger against some group called "the left" backed by little more than hot air and the occasional Guardian article.

And regardless of whether people do say "X thinks Y so they're stupid" (note, not "trash"), is some conclusion like 'stupid' based upon a political position which *can* be changed, commensurate with broad insults like those from DT and his media against something like skin color or national origin, which cannot be changed?I agree entirely that the debate should be respectful, but DT and his media outlets ran the most disrespectful, insulting campaign I've ever seen - it really was revolting and way, way in excess of any of the responses to the original disrespect. And where disrespect was generated against DT, his media outlets and his supporters, it was overwhelmingly directed at DT alone.

I agree with you on Trump's campaign, completely. The loudest voices were often the worst and the most disrespectful. But they didn't get him elected. A huge swathe of people who didn't chip in at all and stayed quiet throughout got him elected.

I have heard the trash argument several times against celebrities, politicians etc who did something wrong once (it could have been something like a stupid comment 20 years ago). I've left social media groups over it.

Maybe we just run in different circles, and while I do not think Trump's campaign is justifiable, nor his views (personally I am actually distraught that a man who sees women as he does will be greeting little girls at the White House) we need to examine WHY these things are happening, and why so many people are falling for it. And the disunity on the left is definitely a factor, as is the chilling of debate. People need to be stronger against this stuff, but in a logical, rational way, without resorting to silencing.

ivytwine

ivytwine wrote: »

I agree with you on Trump's campaign, completely. The loudest voices were often the worst and the most disrespectful. But they didn't get him elected. A huge swathe of people who didn't chip in at all and stayed quiet throughout got him elected.

I have heard the trash argument several times against celebrities, politicians etc who did something wrong once (it could have been something like a stupid comment 20 years ago). I've left social media groups over it.

Maybe we just run in different circles, and while I do not think Trump's campaign is justifiable, nor his views (personally I am actually distraught that a man who sees women as he does will be greeting little girls at the White House) we need to examine WHY these things are happening, and why so many people are falling for it. And the disunity on the left is definitely a factor, as is the chilling of debate. People need to be stronger against this stuff, but in a logical, rational way, without resorting to silencing.

Could thank this a few times.

There is nothing that we should not be able to discuss. All topics are up for discussion. Even if it's to bring it out of deep dark crevices simply to confirm that nope, that's not a good thing, and we should return it to where we got it from.

The regressive left is making waves into this ideal, in a really, really dangerous manner.

Skrynesaver

recedite wrote: »

Now it seems to them that Evil has triumphed and the End of the World is nigh. They'll cop on to themselves soon enough, when nothing bad actually happens.

He's putting Exxon in charge of the EPA, the world may very well end.

recedite

Skrynesaver wrote: »

He's putting Exxon in charge of the EPA, the world may very well end.

I don't think that's literally true :pac:
but I fully expect the world to continue getting a little bit warmer.

On the other hand, with fewer international delegations flying around the world to exotic locations to talk about climate change, maybe there will be some net benefit to the planet?

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

I don't think that's literally true :pac:
but I fully expect the world to continue getting a little bit warmer.

On the other hand, with less international delegations flying around the world to exotic locations to talk about climate change, maybe there will be some net benefit to the planet?

I guess when all the entertainment stars move to Canada the carbon foot print saving in the US will allow Airforce one to stay in the air 24/7 with plenty to spare

robindch

ivytwine wrote: »

[...] while I do not think Trump's campaign is justifiable, nor his views [...] we need to examine WHY these things are happening, and why so many people are falling for it.

I couldn't agree more. From the way he ran his campaign, I believe there's a significant risk that state institutions within the US may not be strong enough to withstand the way he's likely to run his presidency.

ivytwine wrote: »

And the disunity on the left is definitely a factor, as is the chilling of debate. People need to be stronger against this stuff, but in a logical, rational way, without resorting to silencing.

DT is playing identity politics very effectively and - as the people who ran the brexit campaign showed very well - it's virtually impossible to defend against emotions, particularly hate, fear and rage, with logic, reason and experience.