Fully Baked Left Wing Vegan Cookies

Samaris

Students have been pulling this sort of thing for generations. It's kinda part of being a student. For the most part, they grow out of it.

The first mention I can think of offhand of students getting bolshy about government rules was the French Revolution (mind you, most of them got killed). I have a feeling there were a few in Vienna too.

I'd also be inclined to point out that telling people not to come to class on one day is a daft notion that puts everyone out on their schedules. All the student anarchist stuff is supposed to be around classes (although students traditionally have trouble with that idea too).

I'm a bit "eh" on the speakers issue, tbh. Many of those being protested appear to be deeply obnoxious people that want to promote hatred and division, so I don't exactly have a great deal of sympathy for their not being liked. I'm also not particularly surprised that students, being mostly young and idealistic, are protesting in a "ban them" way. Definitely wouldn't be surprised if a couple of relatively sane speakers got banned in the same swoop, that tends to happen. Not really making a judgement as to whether it's right or wrong, just inevitable.

As a side-note, all this happened before in the 1950s and 1960s, only the other way around, when universities were feared to be hotbeds of communism and students were encouraged to report students with Communist sympathies to the university authorities. This is today's outbreak, it could be any which way tomorrow (well, next generation).

robindch

Samaris wrote: »

Students have been pulling this sort of thing for generations.

Edgy students in "students being edgy" shocker :rolleyes:

Shapiro does seem to be a less of a troll than Yiannopolous was when he was invited to Berkeley. Though as with Charlottesville, don't see how the remit of "free speech" is extended in any way by providing dishonest hate-merchants in general with a platform and plenty of publicity which they can then use against the people and the systems who provided them with the platform to start with.

Will be interesting to see if any antifa protesters show up, and if they do, whether they'll be masked again as they have been on some previous occasions. Color me suspicious, but there's a strong whiff of the Russian media playbook here and the Kremlin's specific willingness to stuff protesting crowds with its own people for subsequent propaganda purposes.

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

Edgy students in "students being edgy" shocker :rolleyes:

Shapiro does seem to be a less of a troll than Yiannopolous was when he was invited to Berkeley. Though as with Charlottesville, don't see how the remit of "free speech" is extended in any way by providing dishonest hate-merchants in general with a platform and plenty of publicity which they can then use against the people and the systems who provided them with the platform to start with.

Will be interesting to see if any antifa protesters show up, and if they do, whether they'll be masked again as they have been on some previous occasions. Color me suspicious, but there's a strong whiff of the Russian media playbook here and the Kremlin's specific willingness to stuff protesting crowds with its own people for subsequent propaganda purposes.

muh Russians

robindch

silverharp wrote: »

muh Russians

Not "Russians" specifically, but in certain active areas of Kremlin policy. Despite frequent claims to the contrary, Putin and Kremlin policy generally does not represent many Russians - especially the smart, the wealthy or the honest - and one should substitute the one for the other

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

Not "Russians" specifically, but in certain active areas of Kremlin policy. Despite frequent claims to the contrary, Putin and Kremlin policy generally does not represent many Russians - especially the smart, the wealthy or the honest - and one should substitute the one for the other

its verging on a conspiracy theory though. Im sure all the big countries throw resources at influencing opinion but its like trying to argue with fog.
The US thankfully appreciate free speech more than you do :pac:

robindch

silverharp wrote: »

its verging on a conspiracy theory though. Im sure all the big countries throw resources at influencing opinion but its like trying to argue with fog.

Not sure if you read the post before replying.

Some elements of what's going on does follow the Kremlin media playbook - that could be because the Kremlin is actively advising the White House, but there's little or no direct evidence to suggest that at this time. Alternatively, and more likely, is that Team Trump is intentionally or unintentionally copying some of the Kremlin's strategy and tactics - they're not new, after all and they do successfully pollute the informationsphere, as well as disillusion that part of the electorate and that part of the administrative apparatus of the US which is going to have to pick up the pieces when Trump eventually leaves the stage, a free man or a handcuffed one.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

- that could be because the Kremlin is actively advising the White House

"wonky explanations"... is that what you were saying?

Shapiro speaking at Berkeley is hilarious. They have to allow him because they have been on the defensive over "free speech" and want to shed their reputation for excessive no-platforming. On the other hand they are making it plain to all that they don't really want him there.

Shapiro has been variously described as a jew and an islamophobe, a white supremacist and a breitbart editor, and worst of all he has Russian family connections.
The real problem for this guy is that he has too many talents, so there is always somebody who wants to have a go at him.

Anyway, thank Christ for the new policy.

“We believe deeply in the value and importance of Free Speech, and fully support student groups’ right to invite speakers of their choice to campus,” new Chancellor Carol Christ said in a separate statement.

silverharp

^^

Thats a Christ I can believe in

robindch

recedite wrote: »

robindch wrote: »

- that could be because the Kremlin is actively advising the White House

"wonky explanations"... is that what you were saying?

When quoting people in the real world, it's traditional to include their words in such a way as not to breitbart them. Just FYI, here's the full sentence again:

robindch wrote: »

Some elements of what's going on does follow the Kremlin media playbook - that could be because the Kremlin is actively advising the White House, but there's little or no direct evidence to suggest that at this time.

Hope this helps

recedite

If there is "little or no direct evidence" for it, then why did you put it forward here? Doesn't that make it a fake news item?

robindch

recedite wrote: »

If there is "little or no direct evidence" for it, then why did you put it forward here?

Because it's one possible explanation - albeit an unlikely one, as noted.

Interesting to see that it raises hackles all the same though, particularly since there's evidence now emerging to suggest that the Kremlin has been pulling broadcast and social media strings and one can reasonably surmise that people who promoted these stories at the time, and the media approach generally, are now feeling twitchy about having done so. Two relevant news items here:

http://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari-melber/watch/fmr-sputnik-employee-right-wing-sites-spread-our-russian-propaganda-1045167171957
https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/09/information-operations-update/

recedite wrote: »

Doesn't that make it a fake news item?

Since it's implied that it's somewhere in the range of "probably not happening" to "not happening", I'd have thought not - though again, when the quote is brieitbarted, yes, it can mean whatever you want

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Two relevant news items here:

http://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari-melber/watch/fmr-sputnik-employee-right-wing-sites-spread-our-russian-propaganda-1045167171957
https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/09/information-operations-update/

The first item suggests that the Kremlin could be actively advising the Russia Today TV station, and/or Sputnik news.
OK fair enough (The clue is in the names)

The second item suggests that the Kremlin could be paying for facebook adds. Well, if their money is good....

Neither suggests that the Kremlin is actively advising the White House.

it's somewhere in the range of "probably not happening" to "not happening"

The latter seems a tad more reasonable alright.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

Neither suggests that the Kremlin is actively advising the White House.

For - is it the third or fourth time? - I didn't say it was

Hotblack Desiato

silverharp wrote: »

^^

Thats a Christ I can believe in

Here's a Christ I can believe in -



This Christ family produce the miracle of pickled gherkins, in a rather large can. Rejoice.

Note DPD's 'careful' handling.


https://www.gourmet-versand.com/en/article6665/cornichons-christchurch-4-kg.html

'a good accompaniment to warm sausage' :pac:

https://www.groupe-reitzel.com/en/our-company/news/86-le-rapprochement-des-societes-reitzel-et-christ-preserve-la-production-du-cornichon-en-france

Imagine the stick you'd get in school with a name like that. "Jesus! 'Christ'! would you ever sit down and be quiet, or I'll get your father in!"

robindch

UK universities could face fines for implementing "no-platforming" policies:

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-42481329

recedite

New anti-no platforming policy fronted by the slightly younger and slimmer brother of Boris. I wonder if we'll be seeing more of him in future?

recedite

Holier than thou

Canadian PM Justin "I'm the Opposite to Trump" Trudeau enjoys a trip to faraway India.

Hotblack Desiato

That sounds nice.

recedite

"All Gender Restrooms" opening today in UCD.
The Womens toilets and Mens jax relegated to history.

Check out the iconic "third gender" stick figure on the door, wearing half a skirt.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/ucd-to-re-designate-more-than-170-toilets-as-gender-neutral-1.3400807 Just so you'll know what it is, for future reference.

I'm not sure that Justin Trudeau going to India belongs in this thread?

Also, are gender neutral bathrooms that wacky?

I believe there are plenty of things that we can laugh at that come from some of the zanier elements of the Left but that neither of the two above are even remotely odd enough to warrant attention here.

PopePalpatine

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure that Justin Trudeau going to India belongs in this thread?

Also, are gender neutral bathrooms that wacky?

I believe there are plenty of things that we can laugh at that come from some of the zanier elements of the Left but that neither of the two above are even remotely odd enough to warrant attention here.

They are to someone who drinks Cheeto-flavoured Kool-Aid.

mcmoustache

To people who don't drink the koolaid, gender-neutral public toilets are a nuisance for real reasons.

When I need to pee, I like to walk right into the bathroom, whip it out over a urinal, squeeze out those last few drops, wash my hands, dry them and leave. It takes no time.

I don't want to have to queue to get in. I don't want urinals removed in favour of stalls. I don't want to queue for the sink behind a bunch of girls doing makeup and chatting away to themselves. As I said, all I want to do is go in, pee, wash and leave.

If all the toilets are going gender-neutral, then I'd have a problem with it. I don't think that this is the case though. I'd still be able to whip it out over a urinal and let it flow.

The koolaid drinkers are outraged for irrational reasons, as is to be expected.

recedite

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure that Justin Trudeau going to India belongs in this thread?

You have to laugh at the look on the kids faces in the photo though... "OK, this is embarrassing"

Peregrinus

mcmoustache wrote: »

To people who don't drink the koolaid, gender-neutral public toilets are a nuisance for real reasons . . .

Unless, of course, the people are female, in which case none of what you say about "people" applies to them.

The big advantage that gender-neutral toilets have is efficient use of resources. Since facilities aren't arbitrarily allocated to male or female users exclusively, all facilities are equally available to meet demand, and this avoids the common sight of women queuing to use the female facilities while there are unused male facilities. Of course, this can mean that men may have to queue more often, or longer, than they have had to up to now, since there will be women seeking to use the facilities hitherto reserved exclusively for male use, but the burden of queuing will be lower overall and will be evenly spread as between men and women.

So, the rational, efficient, egalitarian approach favours gender-neutral facilities.

mcmoustache

mcmoustache wrote: »

To people who don't drink the koolaid, gender-neutral public toilets are a nuisance for real reasons.

When I need to pee, I like to walk right into the bathroom, whip it out over a urinal, squeeze out those last few drops, wash my hands, dry them and leave. It takes no time.

I don't want to have to queue to get in. I don't want urinals removed in favour of stalls. I don't want to queue for the sink behind a bunch of girls doing makeup and chatting away to themselves. As I said, all I want to do is go in, pee, wash and leave.

If all the toilets are going gender-neutral, then I'd have a problem with it. I don't think that this is the case though. I'd still be able to whip it out over a urinal and let it flow.

The koolaid drinkers are outraged for irrational reasons, as is to be expected.

Why is this not possible in gender neutral bathrooms?

I've been in plenty that have urinals and cubicles. Its not uncommon.

silverharp

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is this not possible in gender neutral bathrooms?

I've been in plenty that have urinals and cubicles. Its not uncommon.

its not common in Ireland that one is out of sight of the other, most public bathrooms tend to be rectangular with the urinals opposite the cubicles, that wouldn't be a runner if they were designated unisex

I'd only object if urinals were taken out, its my civil right to be able to pee standing up where ever possible

MrPudding

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is this not possible in gender neutral bathrooms?

I've been in plenty that have urinals and cubicles. Its not uncommon.

I mentioned this on the thread in AH, but Coleraine University had what they called "unisex" toilets over 20 years ago.

They were... interesting. They had urinals and cubicles and on a busy night, queues for both. I think they worked well, and whilst the ladies still had to queue, they queued less as there was more capacity. Some guys did suffer a little from bashful bladder, but on the whole they seemed to work well.

I really don't get the issue here. It is interesting, if you look at the thread on AH and look at the names of those thanking the posts that are very against this. You see a few of the same names that you see in the abortion and repeal thread that would be from the anti-choice, anti-repeal side. I am sure someone could write a paper on how people that hold certain views are also likely to hold certain other views.

Also, just to mention, I used those toilets dozens of times and manage not to sexually assault or rape anyone. From what I am reading from those that are against this I think I might be in line for some kind of medal or reward.

MrP

robindch

Deleted User wrote: »

Also, are gender neutral bathrooms that wacky?

Not really, since the bathrooms in most homes are gender-neutral and I don't recall any public angst about them.

That said, Popette has made several attempts to designate certain toilets in her family home as women's or men's - designations which have been roundly ignored by her long-suffering family - but as above, the noise machine is only agitating about public toilets, not private ones.

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is this not possible in gender neutral bathrooms?

I've been in plenty that have urinals and cubicles. Its not uncommon.

its not common in Ireland that one is out of sight of the other, most public bathrooms tend to be rectangular with the urinals opposite the cubicles, that wouldn't be a runner if they were designated unisex

I'd only object if urinals were taken out, its my civil right to be able to pee standing up where ever possible

Male toilets were designed one way before. Female only toilets designed another way.

Purpose built gender neutral toilets (that are not simply redesignated male or female toilets) offer facilities to both sitters and standers. It's not that complex.

I don't really understand the idea that people will exhaust political capital, personal time and effort or much time at all arguing for or against the idea tbh. Its just a toilet. Go expel waste, wash hands, leave.

robindch

MrPudding wrote: »

[...] Coleraine University had what they called "unisex" toilets over 20 years ago. [...] They had urinals and cubicles and on a busy night, queues for both. I think they worked well, and whilst the ladies still had to queue, they queued less as there was more capacity. Some guys did suffer a little from bashful bladder, but on the whole they seemed to work well.

Well, when people gotta go, they gotta go.

More generally, the topic of differential queuing for toilets has been investigated and the results make for interesting reading for architects and designers:

https://phys.org/news/2017-07-lengths-restroom.html

MrPudding wrote: »

It is interesting, if you look at the thread on AH and look at the names of those thanking the posts that are very against this. You see a few of the same names that you see in the abortion and repeal thread that would be from the anti-choice, anti-repeal side. I am sure someone could write a paper on how people that hold certain views are also likely to hold certain other views.

There's certainly been a reasonable amount of research carried out into conspiratorial ideation and one of the more obvious findings is that the number of people who believe just one conspiracy theory is relatively low and that instead, one tends to see clumping together of multiple conspiracy theories within believers. A quick google doesn't find this research, but there is good quality information available in this area.