ilovefuzz.com

Chankgeez wrote:

jwar wrote:We are talking about Pop (a boner) Culture right?

jwar wrote:PC can suck my right and left.

psychic vampire. wrote:Somehow being a veteran makes it okay to participate in the mass extermination of black people? Dragging a troops debate into this is unnecessary. Guy wore a tacky fucking shirt and got called the fuck out for looking like a god damn idiot in a moment when his presence represented more than just himself to many people who saw it. But the people who got upset about that weren't nearly as bad as the Elliot Rodgers or Dylan Roof, and there are a lot of people in America like Elliot Rodgers and Dylan Roof. Stanley Vernon Majors. However you want to slice it.

jrfox92 wrote:https://www.instagram.com/p/BJLlOqahXtc/?taken-by=ladygreyjewelry
I really don't understand this election at all.
Before this election, including a politician's family into the debate was a surefire way to destroy your political (or business, too, I suppose) career.
Now it just adds to it, I guess.

Invisible Man wrote:

rustywire wrote:

Invisible Man wrote:But who are you to say he wasn't a philosopher?

...no one. My opinion. I get burned out by folks who look at fairly shallow arguments that blow their minds, though, and assume it is good thinking/wisdom just because it is novel to them. As in, there's a pretty robust tradition of intellectual engagement with problems that's accessible to anyone near a library.

Not gonna die on the hill of criticizing Carlin. I just notice a high correlation between loving him and burying one's head in the sand.

(I'll say it again, though it seems you get it: not talking directly about you.)

D.o.S. wrote:

jrfox92 wrote: https://www.instagram.com/p/BJLlOqahXtc ... reyjewelry
I really don't understand this election at all.
Before this election, including a politician's family into the debate was a surefire way to destroy your political (or business, too, I suppose) career.
Now it just adds to it, I guess.

That's never actually been true, at least not in this context. If Ivanka wasn't involved in the Trump campaign, you'd probably have a stronger case.

It's a pretty tacky way of scoring points for the shop, though.

ChetMagongalo wrote:I love arguments about PC. ideally the PC "group" would just strive for equity of access to the world right? but I don't really see this consistently from my experience. to me the problem with this "movement" is with the people who are trying to control the language of others because words hurt or they can't deal with being offended by something they don't agree with. they view things that are actually unimportant consequences of living in the first world (people who are truly struggling to survive or are totally outcasted in society are too preoccupied with surviving to be part of a discourse on political correctness) as more than such and malign identities into us and them thinking; which ironically is a less inclusive and equitable environment. Anecdotally a lot of people i've interacted with in real life who seem to be in this PC "group" are often well off enough to where having their feelings hurt or confronting the chaos of reality is discomforting enough to where they feel they are victims (when they are often just confused) and are being "oppressed" when in reality believing in shit like "white privilege" is actually marginalizing in itself and has no function in making our world more equal or a better place; as if you should feel shame in being a white person in a world where white people have been in power historically and that for some reason past injustices that have nothing to do with you as individual should make you feel bad in the present. it's like these people want everyone to feel as bad or lonely as them or something because they can't deal with reality.

for example I was once into a girl who was active in our colleges' LGBT club. obviously there's nothing wrong with that at all, but she once told me that someone she disagreed with on X topic during a club event had no standing in an argument because he was a white male and was "too privileged" to deserve merit in a discussion. how she didn't see the irony in telling me this viewpoint as i'm a white male while also advocating for more LGBT rights in our society was weird and obviously dumb as fuck. the problematic people in the PC "group" are the "feminists" who hate men and the such; they take real issues and twist them into creating a new fucked up hierarchy which is really just flipping a problem upside down.

another example I can think of with issues of PC ideology is when it becomes unacceptable to criticize Islam as being a device to promote violence for fear of being seen as racist or a bigot.

jrfox92 wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:

jrfox92 wrote: https://www.instagram.com/p/BJLlOqahXtc ... reyjewelry
I really don't understand this election at all.
Before this election, including a politician's family into the debate was a surefire way to destroy your political (or business, too, I suppose) career.
Now it just adds to it, I guess.

That's never actually been true, at least not in this context. If Ivanka wasn't involved in the Trump campaign, you'd probably have a stronger case.

It's a pretty tacky way of scoring points for the shop, though.

Maybe not in this specific context.
But if Donald Trump were anyone other than Donald Trump he would've completely destroyed his chances of being in politics at all back during the Cruz's wife thing and would've absolutely nuked any chance of him being a part of society in general when he suggested Cruz's dad was part of the JFK assassination plot.
Yet somehow he keeps trudging along.