Total posts: 2,799
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I thought you opposed Roe V Wade, so you would want a penalty for abortion (because if abortion is banned, a punishment is required and punishing the abortionists won't be enough because if a fetus is a human being, each abortionist has caused the death of thousands of human beings).
Yeah, but I don't support anything nearly as insane as you.
You threaten to forcibly sterilize men because of something a woman they had sex with did. Since they don't have control over whether or not she gets an abortion, that's just blatant coercion. The difference is I don't 'threaten' innocent parties.
You also want to harvest organs.
So putting us in the same boat is about as accurate as calling both people who support fines for violating speed limits and others who support cutting off thieves' arms for stealing "authoritarian".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Imagine the OPs proposed laws went into effect, and the police round you up for organ harvesting due to an unfounded accusation. I hope we would both agree that you have not given consent merely by breathing in whatever country would have such laws.
Yeah, I think we can find some common ground in the anti-organ-harvesting realm.
What I find equally shocking is OP's presumption that the only reason abortions happen is because of deadbeat dads that need to be forcibly sterilized (the seven times the term 'dad' is mentioned, it is preceded by 'deadbeat'). Seems quite odd to automatically make a presumption of a guy being a POS because someone else did something.
I'm not sure if threats will stop sex, but if we ever get dictator Alec, I'm afraid we'll find out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Consent is the big difference.Imagine getting arrested for driving, because the country you're born into declares that your penis makes it a crime for you to operate a car (or get an education).
To an extent, but staying in America (or any specific state with a set of abortion laws) is also by consent. We don't force you to stay in. In fact, I'd bet there are more active pressures to not leave a commune than the US.
And I am not one to support Middle Eastern driving regulations or societal norms of education
Not entirely sure how that relates to abortion restrictions, though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
If someone chose to move to a commune with that as a rule, sure.
A commune and a country really aren't much different
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
On his TV show, Fox News host Tucker Carlson urged Americans to ask "Why do I hate Putin?" and has questioned why it would be "disloyal" for Americans to side with Russia if war breaks out.
Wow, asking your viewers to critically think about why they feel things and how they will deal with those feelings if war breaks out. Scary! OOOOooooOOOOO
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Due to opposing slavery, I will always be pro-choice.
Strikes me more as fulfilling a contractual obligation than slavery, personally.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Putin went after the ' gays ' Hitler went after the ' gays ' and conservatives been after the ' gays ' for many years now. I think were seeing a trend or pattern going on here.
Biden drinks water and likes dogs. You know who else drank water and liked dogs?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Libs always fight for incremental change, and have a vague understanding of how to get there. And will take temporary concessions to help get there. For a very basic example think about how many political careers got ruined in order to pass Obamacare. For something more serious, think about how illegal immigration deeply harms Democrats whenever they are in power but they are nonetheless lenient about it every time. Why? Because they seem to correctly realize that the demographic change is more important for them in the long run than the few marginal seat that will be lost in the next election. I just don't see that from the other side. They had seven years of prep time and didn't have a plan ready to repeal Obamacare. Again Obamacare is a really banal example but I think it demonstrates how hapless the GOP is. The only issue from my lifetime I can think of off the top of my head where it seems that the right wing has essentially won is guns, and in that case there was a powerful interest group that took the lead in that fight, not the party. The NRA fought like the left, and they won
The only example I also recognize is guns, as well. There hasn't been any major gun control passed that I know of since the 1990s. But looking at America for the past century really, it seems that things have incrementally gotten much more liberal, with some strong bursts of change (1960s, for example). Nixon had some limited successes in promoting conservative causes (at least what was possible with the large amount of democrats in Congress). However, even during the supposed "Reagan revolution" in which there was overwhelming conservative power, not a ton of liberal things get meaningfully rolled back. Bush got elected with massive support on a campaign that included opposing gay marriage, yet the second he reached office, he killed any momentum he had by threatening social security with privatization.
That really seems to be the crux of the issue there. While both parties seem to be guilty of not fulfilling campaign promises, at least democrats satisfy their voters with some minor lasting change. Most republicans will run amazing campaigns criticizing crime, illegal immigration, tech censorship, etc., but the second they get in office, they immediately expend all of their energy fighting tooth and nail for tax cuts for rich people and corporations or cutting welfare.
Yea I still don't think liberalism as a whole as really grappled with the reality that much of your identity is just chosen for you, and that it's actually healthy for that to happen. Teenagers have always tried to identify themselves in some way as they grapple with their identities as they come into man/womanhood but man do I miss the classic teenage rebellion instead of thinking too much about gender. I wonder if some of what these kids are saying comes from something real, though. I have a theory that processed foods and endocrine disrupters have basically poisoned American kids. IDK how anyone can see pictures or videos of high school students from the 80s or before and not think they look unbelievably stronger and healthier, more present. Maybe a lot of these kids don't feel like men or women, feel so far off of the paragons of man and womanhood that they don't even wanna try. The smartphone didn't help either imo.
I think the main issue is that, either before their mind is even halfway formed or during the most confusing part of their lives, you have these sick people filling the heads of these kids with all of this crap about gender. The funny thing is that these same people who demand for children to have the right to taking life-altering hormones and mutilate their genitals are also the ones calling for censorship of "misinformation" because Boomers can't be trusted to figure out the truth on their own. Truly insane people.
I think that your theory on the impacts of processed foods is likely more of an explanation for guys who are turning out a lot more soyish. Perhaps that mixed with these snakes confusing kids and a deterioration of a lot of institutions that helped promote manhood and womanhood (honestly, how many fraternal male groups are there anymore?), all lead to this gender confusion.
The highlighted bit is particularly dangerous imo. I think convincing people that they are victims or oppressed pretty much just makes them assholes. I know I have dabbled in the white victimhood thing a bit (look at these mean things people I dont know are saying online :(((((((( ) and it's just not good. So immature and bad for you, can't imagine focusing my entire identity around that sort of thing.
Yeah, while I can at least understand why people would hypothetically support affirmative action, I think that is one of the most important battles for even considering having a functional multiracial society. Its existence inherently creates blame towards those that don't benefit from it- ie. mainly Whites (although Asians also don't benefit much and you'll notice that they are increasingly targeted by media and violent attacks). And when you have massive immigration from people who will fit into said benefiting groups, they will increasingly adopt the mindset of being oppressed because it pays incredibly well! Finally, you'll notice that the people that benefit the most from the system (college-educated blacks, for example) are those that seem to hate America and White people the most.
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
Your comment was essentially just a partisan attack saying “conservatives strawman a lot”, which didn’t appear to be engaging with anything I said.
But if you feel that I’ve straw manned lefties, feel free to let me know
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Yes, I have noticed that myself. I don’t have a perfect answer myself for what I would like society to be like, but in a country where at least 50% of people disagree with the liberal project I shouldn’t have to come up with it all by myself. But here we are. I think part of the problem is that the conservative generally understands that utopia is impossible and therefore has no grand vision because you’ll never get to a perfect society. So he fights a tactical battle. Meanwhile the liberal, especially with religiosity waning and politics acting as a substitute, does believe in Utopianism. Or at least acts as if they do, which is what matters. So they fight strategically, pushing incremental change towards and ideal.
I'm a little confused. Could you expand a little more on what you mean with conservatives being tactical and why you think that doesn't incrementally change things the way that a 'strategic' style does?
This has been going on for an extremely long time. While Harvard professors or NYT columnists 80 years ago couldn’t have foreseen (and wouldn’t have supported) things like CRT or transgender children the basic structure of the world—a globalized, liberal economic order backed up by a hegemonic United States is absolutely something they would’ve supported. You can see the seeds for this planted long long ago if you read old stuff.Liberals really are playing with fire by pushing the envelope on erasing all identity and the defenestration of white people. If they had left well enough alone holding onto the Obama coalition which included massive numbers of working class whites would have put republicans in the political wilderness for decades.
I think that these insane things we are seeing, while they likely wouldn't be supported by many of the earlier scholars, are inevitable when you take the ideas to their logical conclusion. If you try to tear down all traditional forms of identity like the three Rs (race, religion, and region) you are going to have people coming up with increasingly weirder forms of identity like these wacky 100s of sexualities they have now. When you try to minimize the inherent qualities of gender and that your identity is what you choose, you will have people denying biological realities and thinking they can be whatever gender they want- including those more than just the mentally ill. Even supporting a structure of glorifying victims/pushing affirmative action (benefits for supposedly oppressed) you create a system where there are going to be more made up identities to get the favor of this system.
Part of the “problem” with this is that things are just so incredibly comfortable.
I believe there has been some writing on this.... Relating back to the original post, when things are just so comfortable, you'll have people manufacturing crises to have some sort of goal. Things like "bird watching and hiking are racist".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Probably the best pre-2016 piece written on American elections:
While the number is shrinking, the White electorate is 69% of registered voters as of 2019.
That means that Republicans could hypothetically (ignoring electoral votes for simplicity) win 73% of the White vote and 0% of other races and win the presidency. Really proves how crucial it is to not demonize this demographic- trying to go full South Africa decades too early….
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
but apparently you are moved to action when taunted
It takes me minimal effort to respond sarcastically. I just relayed that not only did I not care, I also didn’t ask
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
You are speechless because you have zero worthwhile rebuttal to what I said.
No, I don’t waste my time trying to change the minds of people that block me. Blocking just shows me upfront that you won’t meaningfully engage with and consider anything that I say
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Threads like these remind me why most people who embrace this "do something" philosophy are the ones to attack people like Jordan Peterson for suggesting people focus their energy on cleaning their room before attempting to "save the world"
Or to expand on that, only focusing on national politics in which they have little power instead of state and local politics where they have much more influence.
I do appreciate RM saying that it's a specialty of conservatives to fight strawmen while liberals compare everyone they don't like to Hitler or Klansmen. Really perfectly proves the point I made about the progressive utopian activists living in a different reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Conservatives own ideas about how the culture ought to be are scattered and were mostly defeated decades ago
Just to expand on this, I think another issue with the right-wing in this country as opposed to the left-wing is that we often don't seem to have something that we aspire to. If you ask a liberal what they want, they will often have a pretty specific answer for you. It will often be some egalitarian utopia that won't be ever possible to achieve. So, they will forever have this end goal to aspire to, not unlike religion.
However, if you ask most conservatives what they want, you'll not get some great vision. You'll generally get a response like wanting the 1950s back or back in the prime of [insert name of some world empire]- something that has come and gone. We are willing to settle for a civilization too easily. The most prevalent statement for what conservatives want is related to be against something rather than for something. For example, we don't like CRT, we don't want sex changes for mentally ill children, we don't like how the welfare state is currently set up- we just look at things and want them to be different than they are. We are only really united by the feeling that things aren't as they should be.
I think that for both convincing outsiders of your cause and for keeping yourself motivated, you to some degree need that kind of utopian vision.
We need that for us, but we also need to stay in-touch with reality. We are too in-touch with realism, which tells us we can't accomplish a ton. That's fairly demoralizing and leads to less action. Meanwhile, you'll often see the things that these far-left activists say and you just wonder if you're even living in the same reality. Surely, there has to be some balance between the two? Maybe that's what we're seeing with conservatives finally trying to run school boards across the country, but again that's in RESPONSE to CRT, not with a vision on how education should be.
Created:
@RM
You’re welcome! <3
Created:
Try saying the war is even happening there or a word about Putin or being gay.
@RM
I’ll take you up on all of those. I’ll say that the war is happening- The Ethiopian civil war
Then I’ll say many words about how benevolent of a leader that Putin is.
Finally I’ll top it off with being gay- I’ll show my elation that Russia has such a great guy running the show.
Not sure anything will happen to me, but I’ll sure try it and let you know how it goes!
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Still, if we are of roughly the same mindset (I agree that super safe nuclear is probably an essential component) and the main difference is between a 7 year timeline vs a 20 year timeline then I call that a difference with which we can proceed and see how plans play out.
Yeah, I don’t see too much disagreement here other than the timeline. Quite impressive. Believe it or not, not all conservatives are fine with polluted water and smog.
But one thing I would disagree with would be that you say our fair share is 5% based on our population size. I do think we are polluting more than our fair share, but I’d say the number is closer to 15%. That’s roughly our share of global GDP. I think that having a goal based on population is too restrictive for more productive countries.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Democrats (at least those in non-oil producing districts) have been calling for an end to the oil economy since the Santa Barbara disaster of 1969 and the 1973 Oil Embargo. Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House and Ronald Reagan made their removal a priority. Clinton and Obama invested in clean energy. Bush invented a war to make sure the US increased its dependency on foreign oil. Trump rolled back more than 100 Obama Era clean energy initiatives and actively supported new pipelines in the Middle East, Europe, and North America.
There has obviously been a partisan divide. I don't know the details of those 100 clean energy initiatives that were rolled back. It looks like some rollbacks were good for practical reasons (leaving Paris agreement, arbitrary fuel economy regulations) and some were bad (airborne mercury regulations weakened).
You pose this in a negative light that Republicans are constantly undoing progress towards green energy, which is true, but you neglect that Democrats try to weaken our current strengths in oil, natural gas, and coal which all provide fairly efficient and cheap energy. (And Democrats tend to oppose nuclear power for some reason- the cleanest efficient power source). Also, while I'd prefer new pipelines to be made here, having pipelines abroad would reduce our reliance on OPEC/Russia and put it more towards allies at the very least, as well as having the benefit of cheaper fuel across the globe.
Meanwhile Germany has very expensive power due to their large quick shift to "green energy". I don't want that here. It seems that in the meantime, we should support fossil fuels and make them as clean as possible (working on carbon recapture tech, for example) while we also support research into making green energy actually viable, as some only work when the weather behaves a certain way and massive amounts of batteries would be needed. Whereas with, say, coal, if you need more or less energy, you just burn more or less coal to meet the need.
? Biden halted the XL pipeline with a stroke of a pen. Biden actively opposed Nord Stream since he was a Senator in 1997 and as a VP on behalf of Ukraine but US has little influence in that deal. Not sure how you could fault any Democrats before faulting most Republicans on pipeline construction.
I apologize, I mistyped. I meant to say that stopping construction of the XL pipeline increased our dependence on Russian oil.
Blame do nothing ever Republicans and the oil companies that finance their campaigns. 85% of oil money donations went to Trump in the last campaign. Oil has been a top 5 industry GOP campaign donor since the 1960s. GOP policies have always favored big oil as a result.
And prior to 2016, green energy companies have provided more money to Democrats than Republicans. Numbers from 2014 said 70% went to Democrats. Pretty hard to find exact numbers, but that's what Reuters mentioned. Oddly enough, 2016 and 2018 had more go to Republicans. There isn't necessarily a causal relationship between getting money and the policies. Maybe oil companies are more likely to support the party that isn't openly hostile to their business. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-solar/clean-energy-sector-swings-republican-with-u-s-campaign-donations-idUSKBN1I31DZ
Let's do this. The price of gas was always going to increase forever until nobody can afford it anymore. Might as well push up the timeline and make the transition now. Reserve our oil for defense, which is going to take a much longer time to transition to effective renewables, and for plastics- we are going to need a lot of plastic in the future.
I'm really not opposed to that, it just seems that you would like to do it on a much shorter timeline and with more top-down pressure to push the current huge fossil fuels industries out. I think that the way you propose it would make it incredibly expensive to heat houses and keep the lights on. The price of gas would eventually increase until nobody could afford it, but that would not have happened for many decades.
I think that we could realistically switch to almost entirely green energy in 20 years without all of the growing pains.
Created:
Are you saying you don't think the bloodshed and tyranny even prior to this invasion by Putin is very similar to the Fascist style of leadership that Hitler ran? Prisons in Russia run similar to the Gulags that Stalin had, just this time with a slightly higher aim to keep the prisoners not starving.
I think Putin resembles Hitler about as much as or less than most other authoritarian historical leaders. The intensity of oppression isn’t even remotely similar nor is the level of control, so how about we all be good historians and find better comparisons instead of making such inflammatory comments?
Also, (related to OP) freezing the assets of trucker protestors as if they were terrorists does not need to be compared to Russia’s treatment of protestors. They are both clearly not good
Created:
-->
@oromagi
sounds like a mistake worth avoiding
That article doesn’t make me too optimistic. They set aside $30million in the $2 Trillion plan for figuring out how to set up a rare earth supply chain. They say that our allies like the EU have materials but no expertise on separation and battery making, and at the bottom of the article it says it could take a decade without their help (which we might not even get because of the big environmental concerns they mentioned).
I have no problems with transitioning to EV, but it was foolish for Biden to shoot ourselves in the foot to try to force our hand in the manner (assuming he is Machiavellian and not just dumb). Stopping construction of the pipeline would have lowered our dependence on Russia and would have given us breathing space to transition to EV instead of forcing our hand. Now we have to scramble to get our supply chains ready, and it will be a much messier switch than we had hoped ($4+ gas prices, expensive/limited quantities of electric cars)
And this is all assuming that our companies will pay higher than the slave wage prices they currently do from China, another reason we lost production. We can start another trade war, but I’m not sure the old timer is up to it
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
you guys literally say that but reversed
Mhmm, are you suggesting the tyranny of Putin on protesters is equal to what Canada has done to the truckers in terms of proportional punishment vs action?Also, are you suggesting the cause of the truckers is as necessary and valid as that of the anti-Ukrain-war protesters and anti-Putin/tyranny protesters who have been there before?
Lmao, he did it.
And I don't know why one has to be worse or better. They can considered both good or bad exercises of government power by people who aren't partisan shills that equate Putin to an Austrian painter.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Not for long. Putin broke the only really profitable business in the whole Russian economy. I hope we get away from fossil fuels so fast now that Putin's left selling coal to China for 3 cents per ton.
Then what'll most likely happen is we will become dependent on the even more evil and dangerous Chinese for the rare earth metals needed to make that many electric cars
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
I think Iran should give them some nukes. Then maybe we can all be friends.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
There is a small Eastern portion that I could see splitting off into Russia because they speak Russian (~29%), some of whom are ethnically Russian(~17%). Most of the country does not speak Russian nor are they ethnically Russian
Don’t guzzle the propaganda (semen) spewing from Putin’s mouth (wiener)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
And this study finds just that: higher fertility for men with more income and more "child bearing unions" (I'm assuming that means they get remarried/new relationship and having more kids). Also finds lower fertility the more money women make
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Yeah, I think you make a very good point. I don't think any source splits it up this way, but I wonder how a graph would look if it split it by income within 5-year age brackets. I'm assuming that it would still show the same trend of people making more having less children, just because that anecdotally has seemed to be the case. Using male income would be a much better indicator, seeing how household income would include the wife and working women with high-paying jobs likely won't be having many kids.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I agree. It seems better for everyone involved when you can corral all of them in a single place, although it may be a bit of a concern for the residents near wherever such a dormitory is located.
But I'll be honest, this seems to be one of those topics that's hard to get into the real details. Left-wing people are the only ones who seem to focus on it, so I haven't learned much about what Reagan did except cut funding (no reasoning given). But it seems to me that there were, as you said, rather bad issues with asylums and other such institutions. It doesn't seem to me that they were entirely beyond help, though.
I would say that doing nothing is probably better than some of the half-assed solutions that gives money to people who will just buy heroin.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
State run orphanages, sanitariums, and asylums
Yeah, one of the reasons I'm not a huge Reagan fan, myself. A lot of the people that would have been in asylums roam the streets. No such thing as a good free market solution for homeless and orphans.
Notice I say "good" because ignoring, while an option (as discussed above), clearly isn't a good one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
We figured it out and then Ronald Reagan convinced Republicans to trash that cheaper and more effective solution to support short term budget cuts and short term tax cuts.
I'm not well-versed on homeless policy. What did we do then vs now?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
For once, I’m liking where this is going. And while we’re at it, for those that want to abolish prison, let’s send criminals to their houses 🙌
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
from your link,81% of those surveyed say that they like or love dogs.
And you said that cat AND dog lovers are evenly distributed.
a ten percent variation is hardly "conclusive"it is impossible to know if an individual is "left" or "right" leaning simply by the type of pet they own or the type of animal they say they "prefer"
And incel's test isn't meant to be conclusive, either. A ten percent difference based on Americans who are otherwise pretty similar people is quite significant. Noticing the difference gives some insight into the underlying causes of the difference, which it seems is the point of the test
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
. It is interesting to note that those people who classify themselves as liberals are more favorable to cats (27%) than their conservative compatriots (17%).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Roe versus Wade is not necessarily about abortion. It's about medical privacy. You know that HIPAA s*** you get when you go to the doctor's appointment that's Roe v Wade
It seems that you are utterly oblivious. HIPAA was created through The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
Roe v. Wade was an interpretation of the Constitution
Even if there was no supposed “right to privacy” in the Constitution, you can still have HIPAA
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
dog peopleand cat peopleare evenly distributed between the "left" and "right"
Incorrect
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
It will be super interesting to see how the children who grew up in the forever Covid environment react when they meet kids from Texas or Florida who didn’t have that experience at all
That, and many of these kids will have a crippling fear of germs. Fears are generally learned, and the massive panic at a disease with a small death rate will probably impact them greatly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Is this an autism test?
I got a 34. More or less a paleoconservative
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
We can refer to them as the 13/50 group if you don't mind.
I believe the most recent figure is 13/52. Although, that doesn't quite have the same ring to it.
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
parents separating, neglect, or physical, verbal and sexual abuse
I'd believe it. This seems to line up with a particular group that is getting vaxxed at the lowest rates
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Yes. If people want to change ANYTHING about how society currently operates, they should be specific as to how they want it changed.
The whole point of a representative democracy is that people have responsibilities and cannot be entirely informed on every available issue. You elect people who make specific plans.....
Created:
-->
@oromagi
I guess I am skeptical that nudity, profanity, violence, and suicide were the real reasons for objection considering the prevalence of such themes in 8th grade reading or else all of these books would be on the chopping block.
I understand the skepticism (particularly regarding profanity as a reason), but I still think that it is highly unlikely that the school board is trying to cover up the Holocaust as you suggested by saying "an all-Republican Kentucky school board banned the Pulitzer-Prize winning graphic novel Maus for depicting the Holocaust as something that happened." (emphasis added)
I think that what is most likely is that parents saw the book and disapproved of the illustrations, then called in angry about why their kids had to read a book with drawings including nudity and a "mouse" hanging from a rope. Likely, had the book been a regular novel without illustrations, there would have been no removal from the reading list.
So it makes sense to talk about Totalitarianism with pigs and sheep in Animal Farm but not genocide with cats and mice? I think cartoons are an excellent way of limiting the horror while still maintaining visual impact.
You're correct, there is some merit to using animals as an analogy tool. But that doesn't mean it is the best way to do it all the time. There are different benefits to using historical books or other styles of fictional and non-fiction novels, depending on the learning objectives.
It seems to me that the standards asserted by the school are fairly flexible and dependent on the context. Fine for Twilight, fine for the Bible, fine for Tom and Jerry not fine for remembrances of what happened the last time Western Democracies were threatened by the rise of Right-Wing personality cults.
But again, they asked for another, more appropriate book to teach the kids about it. They aren't choosing not to teach it at all, so I don't understand why choosing a book other than Maus is akin to Holocaust denial.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Didn't a bunch of infotainment celebrities win Pulitzer "prizes" for spreading now debunked Russian disinformation?
I was going to say that the Pulitzer means nothing, but the book did get it thirty years ago. I gave it the benefit of the doubt that the prize wasn't run by clown world enthusiasts at the time.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol, and educators should be using graphic novels like playboy to teach sex-ed too when teaching 12 year olds. If everything is age-appropriate, then nothing is.
I’d probably support that more than their current curriculum 😅
Created:
-->
@oromagi
If profanity, female nudity, violence and suicide are the standards for school censorship aren't you compelled by the necessity of equal treatment under the law to ban the bible from your schools?
Two issues with that analogy: first, as far as I could see, the book was just removed from the eighth grade language arts curriculum (meaning kids aren’t forced to read it to graduate). I don’t believe any public school has the Bible as a mandatory book to read.
Second, even if it was a ban, there would be different standards because of the free exercise of religion issues. Banning the Koran, Talmud, or Bible is a bit different than banning a graphic novel about a genocide.
oh, yeah? And will this new book be the first and only graphic novel to ever win the god-damned Pulitzer Prize for Literature thirty years ago? No, I guess it wouldn't be, would it? Doesn't really make whatever you come up with much of a replacement, does it?
I don’t see why this single book has to be the one way of learning about a European genocide. Simply having a Pulitzer Prize means that it is likely well-written and not necessarily that it is the most instructive book on the matter. Indeed, I doubt a graphic novel depicting it with cats and mice would be the best way of imparting knowledge.
There is no way to describe the Holocaust without describing female nudity and profanity and violence and suicide. It was one the nastiest outbreaks of all that shit to ever happen in human history. There is not some age appropriate way to talk about what the Nazis did to tens of millions of humans- theft, slavery, rape, starvation humiliation and extinction. To whitewash history is to lie to your children, although I agree there should be an appropriate age to hear this story. Let's agree the Bible has more nudity, violence, and suicide than is depicted in Maus. Certainly, if they are old enough to read to the Bible, they can handle the milder stuff in Maus.
From my understanding, the book is illustrated, while the Bible generally isn’t. So there is the difference between showing suicidal depictions and nudity than writing “Eve had no clothes” or “Judas hanged himself from a tree”
Created:
-->
@oromagi
In news that cannot be considered progress, this week, an all-Republican Kentucky school board banned the Pulitzer-Prize winning graphic novel Maus for depicting the Holocaust as something that happened.
It was a Tennessee school, and it was "due to concerns about profanity and an image of female nudity" and "its depiction of violence and suicide"
And they've asked that a new book be found to teach the Holocaust in a more age-appropriate manner
Created:
-->
@Wylted
playing the euphemism wheel game
We are in quite a weird universe when the very same people that insisted that they not be called “colored people” are demanding that they be called “people of color”
Is euphemism wheel the name for this? 😂
Created:
-->
@Wylted
TERF'S ARE cool man. We should work with them on mutual goals
They are “cool” on a very small set of issues. But I’m just about always willing to work with people on mutual goals
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
So you expect the average person to have a regulation or policy figured out to the letter in how they want it implemented?
Created:
I guess some right-wingers could be super cynical and think “if men can start taking women’s privileges, the whole non-male support system would implode”, but I don’t really expect that to be enough of a motivating factor.
Created: