|
Perhaps, but you might be waiting a LOOOONG time to see that given that the anti-abortion guy here we are arguing with claims that 'taxes are stealing', so here's the big disconnect. In order for society to have those structures and policies you need to have taxation.
I can also see that person believing that once the child was born that the society in question would have structures and policies in place to deal with the poor and unwanted. Their concern is strictly with the defenseless that are allowed to be murdered without governement protection.
Some taxation, minimally so. least evil as you can. Do only those things a government needs to do and does best, protect the borders and make the road and little else. And i am not myself anti abortion, i just understand those that are and do not want my pocket picked to pay for others. You want an abortion every third sunday of the month have fun, pay for it yourself. Then again i have no illusions of exactly what that procedure is.
Actually, the 3-month old fetus isn't capable of surviving outside the womb, even with technological assistance.
Did I at any point state, say, or even suggest otherwise?
No.
So why are you saying "actually..." as if you are correcting something I said?
In fact, that's what basic US abortion law is loosely based on.
Did I at any point state, say or even suggest that US abortion law was not based on survivability?
No. I said I thought it was the wrong criteria. So why are you "correcting" something I didn't say? It should be pretty obvious that not everyone agrees with the law.
The other, even more important, difference is that to keep Stephen Hawking alive and functioning doesn't require depriving anyone else of their rights. No woman has to be forced to be an incubator for him.
The only gender neutral correlation we have is with Siamese twins. If one twin needs the others liver to survive separating them would be murder. Even If it would benefit twin 1, twin 2 still has a right to life that superceeds twins 1's freedom.
You don't hang out with many people younger than 35, do you? Because that phrase is pretty standard in that context.I would also expect that person to be busting a nut working their whole timeI'm pretty sure you mean "busting their hump," a euphemism that means working really hard. I'm sure if you google what you put in, you'll find how wholly inappropriate it is ;)
Almost exclusively. I, myself, am under 35. Busting a nut means to ejaculate semen. In context, I don't think Shifty means that people should be ejaculating semen to provide help for unwanted children.
If you're hanging out with a bunch of guys and they say "man, I really busted a nut last weekend" they are NOT complaining about the difficulty of their work habits.
You don't hang out with many people younger than 35, do you? Because that phrase is pretty standard in that context.I would also expect that person to be busting a nut working their whole timeI'm pretty sure you mean "busting their hump," a euphemism that means working really hard. I'm sure if you google what you put in, you'll find how wholly inappropriate it is ;)Almost exclusively. I, myself, am under 35. Busting a nut means to ejaculate semen. In context, I don't think Shifty means that people should be ejaculating semen to provide help for unwanted children.
If you're hanging out with a bunch of guys and they say "man, I really busted a nut last weekend" they are NOT complaining about the difficulty of their work habits.
Then I guess your circle of associates is rather narrow.
I have seen/heard the phrase "bust a nut" used to describe how hard people had to work or would need to work in order to accomplish something within a given framework/timeframe. This statement was used in groups that were almost exclusively men.
|
|
You don't hang out with many people younger than 35, do you? Because that phrase is pretty standard in that context.I would also expect that person to be busting a nut working their whole timeI'm pretty sure you mean "busting their hump," a euphemism that means working really hard. I'm sure if you google what you put in, you'll find how wholly inappropriate it is ;)Almost exclusively. I, myself, am under 35. Busting a nut means to ejaculate semen. In context, I don't think Shifty means that people should be ejaculating semen to provide help for unwanted children.
If you're hanging out with a bunch of guys and they say "man, I really busted a nut last weekend" they are NOT complaining about the difficulty of their work habits.
Then I guess your circle of associates is rather narrow.
I have seen/heard the phrase "bust a nut" used to describe how hard people had to work or would need to work in order to accomplish something within a given framework/timeframe. This statement was used in groups that were almost exclusively men.
Nah meat is right that is the only context i have ever heard it in. maybe this is a regional thing...
Nah meat is right that is the only context i have ever heard it in. maybe this is a regional thing...You don't hang out with many people younger than 35, do you? Because that phrase is pretty standard in that context.I would also expect that person to be busting a nut working their whole timeI'm pretty sure you mean "busting their hump," a euphemism that means working really hard. I'm sure if you google what you put in, you'll find how wholly inappropriate it is ;)Almost exclusively. I, myself, am under 35. Busting a nut means to ejaculate semen. In context, I don't think Shifty means that people should be ejaculating semen to provide help for unwanted children.
If you're hanging out with a bunch of guys and they say "man, I really busted a nut last weekend" they are NOT complaining about the difficulty of their work habits.
Then I guess your circle of associates is rather narrow.
I have seen/heard the phrase "bust a nut" used to describe how hard people had to work or would need to work in order to accomplish something within a given framework/timeframe. This statement was used in groups that were almost exclusively men.
I'll just lump you and meatrace into the same bag as interacting with the same narrow group of people and thinking like each other as a result. :D
It's a completely pointless digression, but I'd use "busting my butt (or ass)". I don't think I've ever heard "busting my hump".
A completely unscientific glance at the internet show "busting a nut" to run about 3 to 1 sexual to working hard.
Edit: Most likely there's a blurring of the lines here. People hearing these phrases in different uses then later misremembering which was which and using them in the other context. Which other people will then pick up and pass on.
I don't think this is a case of people incorrectly remembering things.
I think it is more likely that the usage has grown deliberately.For instance, take the four letter word beginning with an "f" and referring to sexual intercourse, the word f@%%.
The word is repeatedly used as a verb, adjective, and noun that is not meant to directly have that sexual meaning. Eff this, eff that, that is a big effing dog, that is a cluster eff, what the eff, he's a bad mother effer, etc.
I don't think such usages are because people incorrectly remembered what the word f*~& means. it was chosen because it is considered a curse word (due to its sexual nature) and thus it was used to get attention to however it was being used and this usage grew...and grew.
With respect to "busting a nut", it quite possibly (probably) grew from the self-satisfying version of "busting a nut" (i.e. referring to young kids whacking off so hard they would "likely" have their nuts explode...) and was thus used to mockingly reference working under circumstances where extreme effort would need to be put in to meet goals. From there, more common usage to represent hard work grew.
A completely unscientific glance at the internet show "busting a nut" to run about 3 to 1 sexual to working hard.
Depends on what you do for a living I suppose as well :p
Because you immediately jumped in with the Stephan Hawking thing, as if surviving with tech assistance was relevantrather than correcting Craig and proceeding with a relevant debate?
You can't correct someone on an ought question: even with, especially with, the legal response.
And I simply think that approaching the problem in that way is asking for logistical quagmire.
Its swamps to the left of me, quagmires to the right, and a marsh strait ahead.
There is no quagmire free direction.
It also totally ignores a very important factor of the equation.... the rights of the woman herself.
It does not. It merely does not make that the entire equation.
If X > Y no abortion
If Y < X abortion is ok.
We're trying to set X.
The reason we consider infanticide as a crime is that as a society we consider the murder of one of society's members an attack on society itself. Once born, the child is considered a member of society so there needs to be no discussion or comparison or any form of debate as to whether a born child is to be considered human or not.
I cannot see the difference between killing an 8 1/2 month fetus inside of the womb and a newborn baby outside of it.
Prior to birth however, anything involving pregnancy or the continuance or termination of such can NOT avoid involve impacting on the rights of the woman herself.
Which is something to consider, but not the only thing to consider.
I cannot see the difference between killing an 8 1/2 month fetus inside of the womb and a newborn baby outside of it.
Funnily enough, neither can most people, hence why third-trimester abortions are a no-no* in abortion legal areas.
*Some corner cases and caveats may apply somewhere somehow.
It's a completely pointless digression, but I'd use "busting my butt (or ass)". I don't think I've ever heard "busting my hump".
A completely unscientific glance at the internet show "busting a nut" to run about 3 to 1 sexual to working hard.
Edit: Most likely there's a blurring of the lines here. People hearing these phrases in different uses then later misremembering which was which and using them in the other context. Which other people will then pick up and pass on.
I don't think this is a case of people incorrectly remembering things.
I think it is more likely that the usage has grown deliberately.
I find it FAR more likely that it has come to mean that by complete accident, or more specifically as the product of people being dumb. Like a mixed metaphor, commonly misused adage, and the like. They are two phrases with VASTLY different meanings but really only one word difference.
TL;DR your friends are dumb.
But on the ground in the USA where even such programs as "health care reform" and welfare seem ultimatley tailored to benefit the bourgeoise (for example, McDonald's and Wal-Mart) more than the population at large, I'm not so sure.
And more on-topic:
My favorite Anti-Feminist Feminist--although she may be losing her touch in her old age. Certainly, nothing in this profile makes me want to punch her.
Getting soft, Camille?
But on the ground in the USA where even such programs as "health care reform" and welfare seem ultimatley tailored to benefit the bourgeoise (for example, McDonald's and Wal-Mart) more than the population at large, I'm not so sure.And more on-topic:
Good golly gosh. And here I was, thinking that it was a coincidence that the latest issue of the AARP magazine pictured a middle-aged woman as the caregiver for her elderly mother. I'd add that in any number of countries, unmarried women are expected to be unpaid, stay-at-home caregivers for elderly parents, or to "inherit" the job of maintaining disabled siblings. For that matter, married but childless women are, in my own experience, often seen as candidates for these roles. Yeah, yeah, the fangs and claws are showing, but when I've heard the nth + 1 hint from That Relative that "You don't have kids, so wouldn't it be nice if [redacted] could just move in with you? You have so much room!"....etc. Doodles, darling, will you visit me in the booby hatch when I go bonkers at Hint #N + 2 and they find me with bloodsoaked paws, giggling about gender roles and That Relative is nowhere to be seen?
A little hyperbolic but i think she has a point about elementary school.
Doesn't it depend on your definition of "masculine virtues"? She doesn't identify them specifically. Bullying is not a virtue; neither is intolerance of other people's sexuality or life choices. By which I mean that, yes, we all have a right to hold our opinions, and to express them. We do not have a right to use violence against others to do so.
The full WSJ article.
Nothing about Ducks Dynasty, though.
Me and my comrades, both of whom identify more towards "socialist-feminist" rather than "Marxist anti-feminist," were watching some of her old videos on youtube. At first, they were like, yeah, right on, sister! but by the end, Comrade Danny was shaking his head and saying "I want to kick this [redacted] in the [redacted]." Woah, I was about to say, how is that socialist-feminist?, when Comrade Stephanie weighed in "I hope that [redacted] gets [redacted]." Hee hee!
While I don't approve of every single one of Professor Paglia's provocations, I, of course, love a good troll.
Good golly gosh. And here I was, thinking that it was a coincidence that the latest issue of the AARP magazine pictured a middle-aged woman as the caregiver for her elderly mother. I'd add that in any number of countries, unmarried women are expected to be unpaid, stay-at-home caregivers for elderly parents, or to "inherit" the job of maintaining disabled siblings. For that matter, married but childless women are, in my own experience, often seen as candidates for these roles. Yeah, yeah, the fangs and claws are showing, but when I've heard the nth + 1 hint from That Relative that "You don't have kids, so wouldn't it be nice if [redacted] could just move in with you? You have so much room!"....etc. Doodles, darling, will you visit me in the booby hatch when I go bonkers at Hint #N + 2 and they find me with bloodsoaked paws, giggling about gender roles and That Relative is nowhere to be seen?
Working Families Foot the Bill--U.S. Health Care and the Elderly: Capitalist Cruelty
I've linked this before and the following comment:
When I read it in the print version, with pictures of 70-year-old Wal-Mart workers and the inhabitants of shiznitty nursing homes, I bawled my eyes out. On-line, though, the comrades don't believe in pictures, so you may cry less.
Yeah, I don't know. I've never found that one of her more interesting hobbyhorses, but she's been riding that one for at least two decades.
She was a big proponent of working-class male culture within the feminist camp--she didn't like a lot of the sexual harrassment legislation (she thought it was an attempt at the legal codification of white middle class sexual mores) and I remember she had one pretty awesome quote that I'm going to mangle about how she used to find the catcalls of construction workers obnoxious, but, in a world where even soldiering has been computerized, she now looked at it as a remnant of virile male sexuality.
For a lesbian, she's really into virile male sexuality.
I think it's like this. Even if gender stereotypes and roles are the product of misunderstanding, centuries of repression, and antiquated mores, there are things to admire about them. I think she's just at the place where she sees radical feminism as destroying things she found asthetically pleasing (if not sexually attractive) previously.
It's not dissimilar to someone defending religion on the basis that a lot of great art is religiously inspired. Like, true though that may be, I think we're better off without it.
I'm on the fence about gender tropes though.
I'm on the fence about gender tropes though.
If I asked if that hurt would that be a stereotype or biology?
I think it's like this. Even if gender stereotypes and roles are the product of misunderstanding, centuries of repression, and antiquated mores, there are things to admire about them. I think she's just at the place where she sees radical feminism as destroying things she found asthetically pleasing (if not sexually attractive) previously.
It's not dissimilar to someone defending religion on the basis that a lot of great art is religiously inspired. Like, true though that may be, I think we're better off without it.
I'm on the fence about gender tropes though.
Actually, that's a pretty on-topic comparison, because, perhaps due to her Italian Catholic background, perhaps not, Paglia is an atheist who's all over religion. One of her many, many controversial positions from back in the day, for example, was her denouncing ACT-UP as "Gay Stalinism" for their Pussy Riot-like "attacks" on the churches.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why I adore the penis by a radical lesbian feminist
"Women who can't deal with men, who can't deal with the penis, are just immature, they're adolescent. I'm tired of it. I'm trying to bring a whole new kind of sexual sophistication to feminism, to allow even women who are openly lesbian, as I am with my lover, to say that we regard the penis as hawt. It's natural for any woman, lesbian or not, to regard the penis as hawt; your body naturally responds to that.
"There's a puritanism in anglo-American feminism. It's all about trivialising men, jeering at men, diminishing them, cutting them down. People get mad at me. They say, 'It's not true, we're not phobic.' And I say, 'Yes you are. You may have hawt private lives with your husbands or lovers, but when it comes to your stupid ideology, it's completely sanitised.' My feminism is all about strong men, strong women. It's not about strong women, castrated men."
I like the cut of her jib!
Mostly because she doesn't want to cut off my jib.
Eek! She doesn't want to cut off my jibs, does she?
According to the article, she loves them, but an unwanted one comes her way, and she'll cut that thing right off.
According to the article, she loves them, but an unwanted one comes her way, and she'll cut that thing right off.
That's fair enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[
"There's a puritanism in anglo-American feminism. It's all about trivialising men, jeering at men, diminishing them, cutting them down. People get mad at me. They say, 'It's not true, we're not phobic.' And I say, 'Yes you are. You may have hawt private lives with your husbands or lovers, but when it comes to your stupid ideology, it's completely sanitised.' My feminism is all about strong men, strong women. It's not about strong women, castrated men."
Truer words never spoken.
The current blamestorming and trivialising (Anita style) really has to go.
Hypersensitivity is out, a little bit of fortitude is in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
According to the article, she loves them, but an unwanted one comes her way, and she'll cut that thing right off.
Well, maybe she shouldn't hang out in the men's bathroom then.
Lollygagging near the urinals is a surefire way to attract unwanted johnsons, for both men and women.
Lollygagging near the urinals is a surefire way to attract unwanted johnsons, for both men and women.
Custom dictates (ooo er) only looking into the urinal or the wall space directly in front of you; not outward, or to your left or right.
Let's not forget the unspoken requirement to leave an empty urinal between you and the next guy if possible.
According to the article, she loves them, but an unwanted one comes her way, and she'll cut that thing right off.That's fair enough.
Agreed. Of course she also called Lorena Bobitt a coward for waiting until her husband was asleep.
To each their own.
Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson
Never finished this one; read all the stuff about the ancient world, it moved on to discuss a bunch of stuff I'd never read, so I put it down. Should get back to it one day.
Much easier works to digest:
Sex, Art and American Culture: Essays
Vamps and Tramps: New Essays
Break Burn Blow: Camille Paglia Reads Forty-Three of the World's Best Poems
And her latest, which I haven't read, but apparently is full of more crazy shiznit, Glittering Images: A Journey Through Art from Egypt to Star Wars.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vamps and Tramps: New Essays
Am I the only one who secretly hoped this would be a 'picture book'?
|
MMORPGs should be different in my opinion, I mean we're dealing with role players here, and I'd hope that game companies would be mature enough to see that we're not put off by female characters.It's still gaming, and my experience of MMO's is that Roleplayers are very much in the minority and the rest are playing a MMOFPS ina fantasy wrapper. I came out of the ultra-hardcore raiding guilds and 'RP' was about the furthest thing from most peoples minds.I did say "hope"
Guys tend to be Beefcake, like the dude on the second cover you linked, but male cheesecake could exist I suppose . . . I'm not sure I've ever seen it though.Even the casuals in MMO's aren't all that into RP, it was a rarity - they had RP dedicated servers, but once again, that made up a really small fraction.
Cheesecake or not (and the guys are cheesecake just as often) its still women on all their covers leading the show. Firiona Vie to be precise, Elven nature deity and one of the biggest toughies in the game.
Dave Willis talked about the different types of "unattainable beauty standards" in Shortpacked - this was in context of comics but I think it makes a lot of sense in terms of RPGs, too: http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/05-the-death-of-snkrs/falseeq uivalence/