You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Rant’ category.
Have you ever met someone who initially, seems intelligent, but then opens his mouth and forcefully repudiates that notion? Well, that isn’t even close to the case here. The cranial-anal link here is strong with this one, so strong in fact, that stupid flows freely from almost every paragraph, every sentence – hell – every word screams, “I’m a vacuous cretin whose greatest achievement to date has been walking and chewing gum at the very same time.”
The Red Pen Of Justice has a savage wiggle on for Lucien-Maverick and the stupid shit he regularly defecates onto the wordpress #gamergate tag. In this post he manages to get just about everything factually wrong and manage to come off as a massive douche exemplifying how not to be a decent human being.
I know you are excited as I am to delve into this dark hole of stupidity and misogyny, so we shall not tarry any longer!
First off the title of the post: “Is the Puritan Feminist-Left Helping The Religious Right?”
Oh you know this is going to be good and filled with accurate depictions of Feminism. Let me assure you, gentle readers, no straw versions of Feminism will be beaten to death here…
“My cousin shared a rather interesting article with me today. It is from a VERY conservative publication called The Weekly Standard. This article talked about a concept called “Neo-Victorianism on Campus.”
Well, well, well. Using the Weekly Standard as your source already puts you firmly in stupid country. The tl;dr of the article linked is that we should be blaming women for male behaviour; case closed (you’ve been warned, the head to desk ratio is frightfully high following that link).
“In the article, they talk about a contradiction that they see on modern college campuses that plays into their hands. See, I have long made a point about how the Puritan Feminists have been making things worse for women.”
I really need to know what a Puritan Feminist is. Lucien-Maverick never really defines the term, but from the gist of what he says we can 
define a Puritan Feminist as any woman who dares to curtail the power of dude-boners.
“Now I was given a new perspective.”
Is it one that isn’t maxed out on idiocy and a palatable hate of factual information?
“It’s no secret that I am annoyed by the new campaign against what these people see as an epidemic of rape at college campuses. These people are delusional, and what’s more – their delusions are working against them.”
Oh, Lucy-Mavey! You just saved this article by not turning over a new leaf. Now muffin, you are the one who is holding on to beliefs that are not based in reality.
Rape is endemic on college campus and in society in general.
1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).1
17.7 million American women have been victims of attempted or completed rape.1
9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.2
“One in four college women report surviving rape or attempted rape at some point in their lifetime. These are anonymous reports on multi-campus surveys sampling thousands of college students nationwide (Fisher, Cullen & Turner, 2000; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). This rate has remained the same since studies in the 1980s (Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewki, 1987).”
Looks like you’re the mayor of Wrongsville. Congratulations!?
“The article points out that whole movement for sexual liberation of women in the 60’s. It was a vibrant culture war against the prudishness of the 40’s and 50’s, running on the coattails of the larger culture wars being played out in the 60’s. This war got women to be able to be more sexually expressive.”
LOL forever. Vibrant culture war my ass. Dudes wanted and got access to women. This so called “sexual liberation” was cover for the reality of more dudes being able to dip their wicks into women without social repercussions.
Let’s be straight here, there were good glimmers for women in the 60’s, but good things started happening when women started organizing to protect themselves and promote their rights as human beings – a little movement you might have heard of – called Feminism.
“If only the women who fought those battles, who were worthy of the term “feminist” could see things now.”
Ah yes, because only with Male Approval can we identify the “true” Feminists. I’m not sure if Lucy-Mavey is being more stupid or more ignorant. I’ll let you, avid readers, choose his poison.
“With the Puritan Feminists on college campuses trying to make VERY strict guidelines and making those in positions of authority enforce them, we are seeing the liberation that so many women fought for being gradually taken apart, one rape allegation at a time. “
Whut? Are you really trying to say that codifying consent is somehow restricting women’s liberation? Why would women restrict their libert….. Oh wait…I get it now – If you replace “liberation” with “dudely access to pussy” your semantic confusion just clears the fuck up in hurry. How very noble of you and your crusade.
“Of course, that’s how it works nowadays. If a woman makes an allegation [of] rape, the Puritan Feminists and the public at large seem to take it at face value. “
Moving in this direction is a good thing considering the piss-poor conviction rates when it comes to rape and reporting rape. It’s almost like there is a systemic bias against women and their reporting of being sexually assaulted.
Hmm. The likely-hood of seeing their abuser walk free and the certainty of having their name and history dragged through the mud, women tend not to report being sexually assaulted.
“Why this is is beyond me.”
Sadly, you’re a fairly dim bulb Lucy-Mavey; this foundational truth is the cornerstone of the monument of fail you posted.
“The whole idea of “innocent until proven guilty” is gone. The article about UVA is proof of this. It’s now, “innocent until accused, which the social justice echo chamber will validate”. And if you think about it, it’s madness.”
All gone. The systemic privilege bestowed on males to rape nearly at will is in jeopardy! Who will defend this noble right?? Lucy-Mavey of course, because now his “rights” are in the cross-hair and that is a fracking big deal. (Never mind, of course, the rights of the women who have had their rights trampled on since, oh well, the beginning of civilization – oh no – we have to prioritize!)
“After all, they say that 1 in 5 women are sexually assaulted or raped. That would mean that 20-25% of women on campus are the victims of sex crimes. As my cousin pointed out, that would make both men and women very afraid of going to college, if this sort of thing was proven to be accurate.”
Women are afraid to go to on many campuses because the threat to their persons is real.
‘But it hasn’t been.’
Because apparently having a penis allows you to blatantly disregard the facts of a situation.
” The reality is that the 1 in 5 statistic is marketing. Brilliant, brilliant marketing. Something people forget is that most of the SJW women have degrees in Communication or Marketing or things like that. They know how to sell a product.”
Huh. Those communication and marketing degrees are made of pretty heady stuff. The assertion Binky makes here takes us, with certainty, into the tinfoil hat region of ‘rational’ argumentation.
“And the product here is – women are constant victims and men are bad. “
Well you’re half right, women are the majority of people who are sexually assaulted. As Rainn.org cites – 9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.2 No mystery there.
“The worst part about it is that they are using actual rape victims as props in a thinly-veiled misandry campaign.”
I’m not sure how this even works, but I do get that Lucy-Mavey is blaming women for the stupid shit men do. Oh hey! Misandry isn’t a thing. It cannot by definition exist as the societal systemic nature of society inherently favours, rather than discriminates against men. See this short informative video for further elucidation.
“I find that kind of sick, personally.”
I find that making a choice between a stinking sack of shit and you Lucy-Mavey, I’d choose the sack of poo every time.
“In the end, though, there is a much darker implication. Think back to the women who fought for sexual liberation. Now, think about the women who are trying to make women constantly afraid of men.”
Women should be afraid of men as they constitute the majority of perpetrators of violence against them. Lucy-Mavey doesn’t get causation.
“Women see men as the enemy and will do whatever they want in order to punish men for whatever the Puritan Feminists say is wrong, based on a crisis that they manufactured wholesale by using real victims as props.”
Wow, this is all about punishing men and playing the oppressed dominant majority card isn’t it? Enough men act shitty within the boundaries of society, thus appearing as a real threat to women, and somehow it is a crisis manufactured by women? Lucy-Mavey certainly goes to the venerated chestnut of misogyny – blaming women for men’s poor behaviour – with rabid commitment.
“Well, to men being in the Puritan Feminist Inquisition, where they can be accused of rape, because they didn’t ask a girl for permission at every single step of the process from kissing to getting their freak on. Yes, it’s a bold new world.”
What??!? Treating women as if they were fully human and their consent is required? Unpossible!
“The Religious-right should be in awe. I kind of am. “
Actually, I’m in awe of how much jaw-dropping stupid is being put on display by you Lucy-Mavey. Your dedication to the liberation of bonerz is admirable on so many levels…
“In less than 5 years, these people have decided to roll back all the work that women who actually cared about other women worked so hard to do. It amazes me.”
Who are these women who were campaigning so vigourously for their right to be fuck-toilets? It seems that more likely that seeing that the status-quo that favours your particularly odious worldview is being rolled back a bit and rather than up and up say that, you overlay your bleatings on women that simply do not exist.
“What it all boils down to is this – these people are manipulative con-artists who are using real victims as props for their own agenda. Or, in the case of Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian, they will exploit whatever controversy they can find in order to sell their line.”
Because receiving rape and death threats is “exploiting the controversy”. *Sigh*
Well, we should thank Lucian-Maverick for his important contribution(s) to the progressive egalitarian ideal.
On second thought, we should mock the glaring ignorance of this man-childe and rightly categorize his utterances as fool-fodder that can be safely ignored once properly ridiculed. Hell, lets let Willy S have the final comment on his character : “Thou are a boil, a plague sore, an embossed carbuncle in my corrupted blood.” (King Lear).
RPOJ out.
It is amazing the amount of turgid self serving drivel that gets posted these days about Gamer Gate. We’ll investigate today, one individual along with the trusty RPOJ (Red Pen of Justice), embattled gamer -“Maverick”- and his quest to achieve victory over Anita Sarkeessian and the evil wimmenz gamers in general. This post is about Anita’s recent appearance on the Colbert Report and what a crafty manipulator she is. Let’s look at the video first just to get some context of what is going on here.
“I have watched the interview of Anita Sarkeesian on The Colbert Report. I called it, the interview was all about how Anita is a victim and we gamers are bad people. I am not surprised by this in the least. When you have a battle where it is the people who take in journalism vs. the journalists, this is how it goes. “
You mean the person who has been the subject of online harassment, rape and death threats for years gets to speak about her experience then *you* get to use victim in a pejorative sense? What fucking planet are you from dude?
“Journalists side with their own, and because mainstream culture is out of touch with the issues that sparked GamerGate, on the heels of some BRILLIANT marketing by women like Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian, we are being singled out as the enemy.”
Woah, slow down their Mr. Tinfoil hat. Professional journalists follow a code of ethics and ‘siding with their own’ would happen only if the facts of the matter dictated thus. You see my gamergater friend if this was actually about ethics, the focus would be on the collusion that does take place between game production companies and game journalists. Strangely though, most the focus seems to be on how amazingly “reprehensible” these damn woman are – Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu. Your analysis, Maverick does not deviate from the usual misogyny and victim blaming that gamergate is known for.
” You are the single-greatest professional victim I have ever seen. You have branded your name and gotten fame all on the coattails of you being a victim. Your audience doesn’t care about why of who. They only care that you are upset, and they are upset. You know how easy it is to exploit your audience, so you do. That is impressive.”
Wow Maverick your brazen victim-blaming makes you eligible for high-douchlord status. Congratulations?
“And so, a zealot by the name of McIntosh got ahold of you, and thus began your rise to fame. For McIntosh, I believe that it is genuine. I’ve read some of his older stuff, and that guy is a Looney Tune.”
Ah, because a woman couldn’t possibly do this herself. I’m guessing that Maverick, the noble defender of the status-quo, is also a firm believer in ‘equality’ too.
“But you, you are too smart for that. You’ve come to realize how easy it is to sell your cause. After all, you got your cause to get you $160,000.
And don’t tell me how far that money went. Come on. You made videos that were of the same caliber as your old ones. Your ‘research’ was using people’s Let’s Play footage. You never show any context in your videos, because you don’t know any”
Wow, these dudes never forget the butthurt. Maverick, hates….just hates that fact that a Kickstarter project started by Anita was resoundingly well funded by people seeing the need for the feminist analysis of video games. Despite that fact that this was known upfront, and people made the donations of their own free will we still get shit like this.
Furthermore, making general claims based on zilch means nothing outside of your toxic community. So this is just your baseless opinion.
“You didn’t even do the bare minimum of research. This was just finding clips and using the right rhetoric to get your audience to get all huffed-up and angry. It was a calculated decision.”
You’re making that claim of “no research” based on what? It would seem that there in the Feminist Frequency videos there is a list of sources consulted. I imagine feminist theory does sound like rhetoric to you, but like instead of adult behaviour of actually addressing the points brought up by Anita and her video’s you engage in name calling and attacks on Anita’s credibility. It’s almost like you know that if you actually addressed the issues, you’d lose.
“You are now famous because of the threats. You are famous because of the anger, which you are able to hold up. That recent threat that you got when you were going to speak at USU, you couldn’t have asked for better timing. It elevated you to mainstream acceptance. Now, I bet raising another $160,000 would be child’s play. Hell, I bet that you are going to get a lot of money from here.”
Exposing the misogynistic undercurrent of our culture – who would have thunk that would be a popular topic? Anita is famous because douche-lords like yourself can’t handle criticism. And you get nasty when you’re called on fact that your treasured status-quo is shite.
“You are a con artist, Anita. A very, very good con artist.”
No, actually she’s a woman whom, despite the huge threat to her, continues to call out and expose the misogyny in “gamer-culture” despite the toxic backlash she has to endure.
Confused about the who Gaming Gate fiasco? Go to the Ace of Geek for a comprehensive run down on how badly this “movement” fails.
Let it be said up front that this cranky second waver bears no animus with regards to hamsters, electric vehicles, or dancing. Yet, once these elements are mixed into the toxic soup of everyone’s favourite capitalistic patriarchal construct – better known as ‘our society’ – hilarity is bound to ensue.
The advertisement in whole, before we begin.
This commercial is about selling cars. (Duh!) But who is the target audience? (if you thought hamsters, please leave now there are places better suited for your attentions). Let’s break this down and take a look at the characters.
Science Hamster #1 – Red bow-tie, suspenders.
Science Hamster#2 – Red bow-tie, red glasses and polka dot shirt.
Science Hamster#3 – Rasta hat, white shirt.
Because not all dudes are not into science! Bonus marks for catching the racial commentary this characterization is making.
Female Hamster in Ball – Brown and cute. Context wise we don’t know the ball hamster is female, but with time spent on establishing a connection one could assume.
Small, helpless, and cute. Thematic material anyone?
We’re 10 seconds into the commercial and what do we have here – 3 male represented characters creating, designing, and actively teching out with all sorts of futuristic displays and machinery. The female role, to smiled and waved at; the unsurprising passive receptacle for male attentions.
Audio note – “Baby I’m preying on you tonight. Hunt you down eat you alive,. Just like animals (x2). Ah yes because the predator/prey relationship is so sexy, and filled with equality too!
Well nothing new here under the sun so far, but as with most patriarchal adventures it gets worse the farther you go. Our intrepid female hamster gets herself into a jam by wheeling her ball into the experimental area and is zapped along with the vehicle by the transmogrifying beams of science.
Oh, silly female! Caution be thrown to the wind cause she doesn’t get Science!
Our first glimpse of her portents much of what is to come. Disembodied woman parts with feminine signifiers for the winz!
The body parts of women – sexy!
The requisite Male gaze.
To quote Keanu Reeves: Whoa…
And after a full body pan, we as viewers to get to experience the male gaze. Just some reinforcement in case you missed the objectification the first time around.
Audience gets to objectify her to, as women should be judged by the quality of their tuckus.
Now that we have primed the audience for sexual objectification, lets use it to sell the damn car!
Inviting female = inviting car?
Where is the female empowerment (do tell my Third Wave friends)?!? Oh wait the power of love. How charmingly original for a female character (do contrast this with the creator, the scientist, the engineer).
Empowerful stuff going on here.
Oh, dudes like their technology more than any single vampy female. Let’s get a shot of her looking flummoxed so we can reiterate the “female body selling car” angle again. We do remember the advertising truism – the sexual objectification of women sells.
Damn, they picked me over a car, what could they possibly after?
Our intrepid dudes roll to the nearest pet store to ‘pick up some chicks’. Consider the perceived power differential – the dudes looming over a cage of helpless females – and of course the anvilicious buying of women for happy fun sexy times.
Write your own snark about how empowering prostitution is…
So cue more science and boom! Let the female empowerment roar while striking sexy poses for dudes (science and/or otherwise)!
Huh, because vamping for dudes is approved female behaviour!
Recently bough females remarkable receptive to their buyers, with nuzzling and other overt signs of female powah affection.
Oh, we like you dudes and our role as eye-sex-candy and everything is awesome, see how much fun are having?
Cue the formation dancing with of course, our protagonists front and centre, we must never forget the centrality of the man and his power.
Never forget who is the subject and who is the object.
And thus endeth the analysis.
Going through this post made me think of all the conversations, mostly with men, about how we don’t need feminism anymore because we are an equal society now thus there is no use for feminism or feminist analysis. This was a cute commercial until you actually look at the underlying patriarchal messages that surprisingly happen to dovetail nicely how society perceives, and thus, how society treats women in 2014.
You could knock me over with a feather given how surprised I am about the level of misogyny present in our media.
As always, IBTP.
I get email:
From the Sandyhook Promise –
Dear Friend,
“The person who killed my precious son Dylan carried 10, 30-round, large-capacity gun ammunition magazines into Sandy Hook Elementary. 300 rounds. He deliberately left the smaller-capacity magazines at home.
In approximately four minutes, he shot 154 bullets, killing 20 children and 6 educators. Five of those bullets hit my son, and in an instant, Dylan was gone.
But in the time it took the shooter to reload, 11 children were able to escape. If magazines were reduced to one-third the number of rounds available that day, just think how many more could have survived. Perhaps my son would still be alive.
Right now in New Jersey, the clock is ticking for Governor Chris Christie to decide whether or not to sign a bill into law that would reduce the size of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds – and opponents of common sense reforms from across the country are pressuring him to veto it. We need your help today to make sure Governor Christie signs this common sense, potentially life-saving bill into law before the June 30 deadline.”
Reduce the size of the magazines?
Let me ironically restate that in bold lettering – Reduce the size of the magazines? (???)
One hundred and fifty four bullets and twenty-six deaths later the people in the US are talking about reducing the size of magazines? How ridiculously absurd is this plea?
How is this even a thing? Don’t even start to talk to me about incrementalism – how many more berserk white dudes killing scores of people does it take for the US to wake the frak-up and institute gun control?
Gaaa!
[Source]
Today’s Red Pen of Justice edition is brought to you by the clueless parvanimity of Neil Macdonald. Mr. Macdonald has many important opinions on Rape Culture and, shockingly enough, they are completely out-to-fucking-lunch-brain-gone-fishing, wrong.
“For people my age, the freedom to get drunk or high and then have sex with someone was a right guaranteed by the sexual revolution of the Sixties.”
Oh!! So you valued have available female fuck-toilets to bang when you were getting crunked in name of peace, luv and rock and roll. Wow, funny how the ‘sexual revolution’ that gave dudes more peentacular access to women is lauded while the current battle for female bodily autonomy and consensual relations is slandered.
One paragraph in and you need a machete to cut through the misogyny. Awesome!
“Heaven knows that much of the world, beginning with Islamic societies, still discourages or forbids such behaviour. Oh, and also Yale University.”
Ah yes, because Islamic religion and Yale are completely the same.
Idiot.
Islam is all about protecting women’s modesty from the phaser-like dick beams that emanate from Islamic men. Women’s bodies drive Islamic men around the jizz-tastic bend (tru-fax!!) therefore its into the gunny sack for Islamic women and most of their rights. No misogyny here, move along, move along please.
Yale is attempting to ensure that people are not unwilling participants in sexual and social encounters within their institution. Here is what the Yale Policy says:
“Sexual activity requires consent, which is defined as positive, unambiguous, and voluntary agreement to engage in specific sexual activity throughout a sexual encounter. Consent cannot be inferred from the absence of a “no”; a clear “yes,” verbal or otherwise, is necessary. Consent to some sexual acts does not imply consent to others, nor does past consent to a given act imply present or future consent. Consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual encounter and can be revoked at any time.
Consent cannot be obtained by threat, coercion, or force. Agreement under such circumstances does not constitute consent.
Consent cannot be obtained from someone who is asleep or otherwise mentally or physically incapacitated, whether due to alcohol, drugs, or some other condition. A person is mentally or physically incapacitated when that person lacks the ability to make or act on considered decisions to engage in sexual activity. Engaging in sexual activity with a person whom you know — or reasonably should know — to be incapacitated constitutes sexual misconduct.”
Whoa. You go Yale! Treating people with bodily autonomy and safeguarding their rights. Let us see what McShitstain, err… Mcdonald thinks about a treating people with dignity and respect…
“A person who is incapacitated by alcohol or drugs cannot by definition consent to sex, and is therefore a rape victim if sex occurs. If both parties are drunk, presumably, it would be up to Yale administrators to decide who was the rapist and who was the victim. This may all sound beyond the realm of common sense, but it is real.”
Do take note and sample the fine airs of special pleading that is happening here. The only case mentioned were both parties are drunk. McShitstain, you and other entitled man-children like you can fuck right off forever. If both parties are drunk then no action between either is predicated by the rules set out. This isn’t rocket science – the default action when consent is in question is to back off and not do anything.
Did you feel that that? As a matter of fact, I felt it – a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of man-bonerz suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
TL;DR – Your entitled man-attitude and fucking stiffy does not trump women’s right to be treated as a human beings. I feel like I’m giving shit-stains a bad name by associating them with you… Onward turd-lord!
“American universities are under serious pressure by federal authorities to do something about the “campus rape culture,” as some call it – 55 U.S. colleges and universities are currently under investigation for failing to protect students from sexual harassment or assault.”
Protecting your students from rape? GTFO! The nerve of some schools trying to provide a safe environment for their students. It must be a communist plot or even worse – a socialist one. And why is protecting students a bad thing? How is a raging sac of bollocks like yourself even allowed near a keyboard when it comes to this issue is completely beyond me.
“Alarmed at the growing perception that they’re becoming havens for rapists, the schools are coming out with codes of sexual behaviour that go far beyond criminal law.”
Good. Good, good, goodly-good. Because the law isn’t doing enough to combat the sexual abuse and harassment in our culture. This is what setting the bar higher looks and feels like – sorry about the bruise on your forehead, asshat.
“Therefore, if a college administrator thinks that you more likely than not violated a lengthy, highly detailed set of sexual rules, you’re not just expelled, you may also be shamed in the media as a sexual predator and stained for life.”
But, but, but, the ‘peen was meant to run FREE! Oh woe! The onerous burden of consent you must really know how Atlas feels eh? The president of Shitistan just called, he wants you to stop ruining his country’s good name…
We are not done with you yet, douche-nozzle in training. How dare you compare the shaming of sexual predators with victims of rape. How the ever loving frack do you do this? Have you discovered some sort of dark energy that requires you to have your head firmly embedded in your ass?
“Presumably, the government has decided that the need to avoid further traumatizing victims trumps an accused’s right to question the accuser. The intent behind all this is laudable. I say that as the father of a daughter who just graduated from university. But what the universities are doing is also frightening, and I say that as the father of a son who is going into his senior year.”
Shorter Douche McAsshat: My male right to a woman’s body is being violated, changing behaviour to make people aware of boundaries and personhood infringes on my right to be a dude.
“Not only are universities all over America substituting their administrators for police and courts, they are attempting, with the best of intentions, to parse and regulate human behaviour down to the least gesture and syllable.”
Overcoming patriarchal constructs is HARD, dipshit. If it was a walk in the park, unlike now because of your whinge-baby-mantrums dressed up as a noble defence of the status-quo keep getting in the way of progress, we’d be over the idea that consent is some sort of weird idea requiring two Rosetta stones and the wisdom of the ancients to decipher.
“[…]”
“Alas, this is not a public debate that encourages critical writing.”
You don’t say.
“After a White House task force declared in April that one in five women on campus has been sexually assaulted, and that only 12 per cent of sexual assaults on campus are reported, Dr. Mark Perry, an economics prof at the University of Michigan, ridiculed Washington’s math by using actual sexual assault figures from three schools.”
Too bad Dr. Mark Perry screwed up the analysis.
“Another key fact Perry’s analysis misses is that colleges only track certain types of sexual assault in their numbers. Typically colleges only report assaults that occurred on campus and/or assaults in which the accused perpetrator was also a student at that university. So, again, we expect the numbers tracked by a university to be smaller than the number of assaults their students actually experience and report to local police.
The take home point is that the number tracked by the college would only be a fraction of the assaults that George and Mark are using as a comparison. The mismatch doesn’t mean the prevalence figures are wrong — it’s that they have compared a select group of cases that are tracked by a university to a wider group of assaults that their students experience and report to local police.”
Whoops – hate to deflate your confirmation bias Neil.
“Conservative commentator George Will, a sober analyst if there ever was one,[…]”
As long as you’re into mostly irrelevant arch-conservative altiloquent drivel. His level of poisonous bullshit is an post unto itself. See the Michigan Chronicle for rebut of his asinine diatribe.
“[…] then cited Perry’s critique in a column, suggesting that colleges, with their extra-legal sexual conduct rules, and their “trigger warnings” about offensive languages in textbooks, and their campus speech codes, are treating students like fragile hothouse flowers, rather than preparing them for the world.”
Ah yes, the real world where, you know, patriarchy and misogyny are the gold standards and you just need to abide by them. Treating Patriarchy as some sort of inevitable force of nature is bullshit Neil, stop it.
“Four U.S. senators promptly blasted Will as an antique who trivializes and legitimizes sexual assault, perpetuating myths created by victimizers.”
See, we do have progress in society.
“There was similar blowback last year, when journalist Emily Yoffe had the temerity to suggest that while sexual assault must be punished young women might also want to avoid getting blind drunk Yoffe quoted Anne Coughlin, a professor at the University of Virginia and an expert on feminist jurisprudence, as saying more or less the same thing. Those who believe there is a rape culture on American campuses have called that “blaming the victim.”
Because blaming the victim totally doesn’t happen… Neil saying shit like this that puts you into multiple facepalm territory, your ignorance is dangerous and you should stop spreading it around.
“But every parent should certainly consider this: If the complications of human sexuality and its often ambiguous mating dance defy consistent definition by the intellectual candlepower of entire university faculties, what advice should you give children who might still be in their teens as they head off to college?”
What, exactly, is ambigious about consent? If you have it great, if you don’t, stop proceedings immediately. If you’re not sure, stop proceedings immediately. My God, the epic complexity of this notion – we need more SCIENCE on this one dudes…
“his would be mine if my son or daughter were ever to ask: If you feel the need for a sexual adventure, seek it off campus, where police have expert investigators and courts guarantee your rights. Due process, in other words.”
Because expert investigators and the courts are always so darn sympathetic to the victims of rape. I have no words for the sheer amount of stupid you’re doling out in your ‘advice’.
“And avoid sex with fellow students, period. It’s just too risky nowadays.”
Because changing the misogynistic ground rules of society is much much much MUCH too hard, so take your balls on go your own way. If this perchance helps exclude your type of thinking from the next generations gene pool, I think we can call your strategy a win for everyone.
RPOJ out.
Dear Religious people,
Have you thanked your local atheist today? If not, you should because atheism and by extension secular society, is saving you from the immoral loopy shit your bronze age beliefs demand. The latest demonstration of how immoral and barbaric religion is comes to us from the Sudan. (read more about Mariam at Al Jazeera)
“Mariam Yehya Ibrahim, a Sudanese mother, doctor and Christian, has been sentenced to flogging and death unless she recants her Christian faith. She is 8 months pregnant and has a two-year-old son. Please, join the international community in asking Sudan not to execute her for being a Christian.”
Wow.
You “go hard” there Islam – the religion of peace and friend to women across the globe.
“Ibrahim is charged with adultery on the grounds that her marriage to a Christian man from South Sudan is considered void under Shari’a law, for which the penalty is flogging. She’s also charged with apostasy, or abandonment of religion, for which the penalty is death.”
Well you can see the problem here, obviously, that if you decide to change from one fatuous belief system to another, the penalty is death. Funny we don’t hear about these sorts of things in North America. You can thank god that the United States wasn’t founded as christian nation – if it was, this sort of egregious crime against humanity would be common place in the lower 48 all the time.
You know why it isn’t? (hint: rhymes with ‘Fecularism’)
The very secular foundations of society that the christian right is chipping away at are the very same foundations that are preserving the “not-allowing-stupid-religious-shit-to-go-down” haven that Americans inhabit.
Witness the fucking evilly deranged face of theocratic rule and tell me that this is what you want for your society? Getting a little closer to god gets you a little closer to barbarity. How depraved must one be, in the pursuit of a religious based society, to somehow think that theocratic rule is good?
“Mariam is the daughter of a Christian woman and Muslim man. She was raised Christian after her father left. However, Sudanese law mandates that children born to Muslim fathers are considered Muslim.
The fact that a woman could be sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion is abhorrent.”
This does NOT happen in modern secular society.
Your pious objections to secularism are noted; you can now sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up and think about the good that secularism has done for you and your freedom to believe in vacuous mythology of your choice. Maybe, just maybe, instead of campaigning for and electing people with ‘good christian values’ you could decide to support someone that is defending your very (comfortable) way of life, here in reality, where it matters.
Continue to erode the secular aegis at your own peril.
Lastly, get off your damn knees, stop praying, and go do something useful for once – sign the petition to save Mariam’s life.
It sucks when your government is an entity devoid of anything resembling a spine. *sigh*
The Alberta government is so deeply in bed with big oil its shite and piss are black. So, rather than looking at an example of how to screw your citizens over, take a look at a country that got it, and continues to get it right; Norway. It makes me spitting mad that we couldn’t even get a fractional raise in revenue for the people of Alberta (The Royalty Review), all the while Norway has 165,000 thousand dollars socked away per person for its retiring population. You fucking old people (and you fucking young greedy capitalists) who can’t vote anything other than Tory in Alberta, enjoy working past 65 and as an extra sweet bonus we’ll save you a spot working at McDonald’s until your body and mind are well and truly done. Savour the sweet capitalist freedom to work yourself to death, I know I will.
My bitter vitriol aside, onward to the article that got this party started:
“Like parts of Canada and the United States, Norway has a very lucrative oil and gas industry. But unlike Alberta and Alaska, Norway chose not to use its resource wealth immediately to pay for hefty tax cuts or social programs. Instead, the Scandinavian country squirrelled its money away in a fund for future generations, a decision that is paying enormous social dividends.
Today, less than 25 years since its inception, that nest egg has grown into the world’s most valuable sovereign wealth fund, worth about $850 billion – more than $165,000 per Norwegian citizen, according to an SWF Institute report. It is the envy of the world, funding initiatives ranging from infrastructure improvements and green energy projects to public pensions.
Meanwhile, the Alberta Heritage Fund, which is 14 years older, is worth about $17 billion. The Alaska Permanent Fund sits at $50 billion. Even combined, they represent a fraction of the wealth Norway has amassed, and which it will be able to draw on long after its oilfields run dry.
Farouk al-Kasim on Norway’s Oil Policy and Wealth.:
“They did not have a clear enough policy for how to manage petroleum resources when they were starting out,” he said. “Norway concluded that if you don’t have a policy up front, and if you don’t have a consensus on that policy, that human nature would tend to favour individual interests rather than coherent national interests.”
In 1971, shortly after the Ekofisk discovery, the Norwegian parliament drafted legislation that came to be known as the country’s “10 Oil Commandments.”
“These 10 Oil Commandments form the basic policy on which Norway has managed its petroleum resources ever since,” al-Kasim said. “And the politicians not only agreed on this document, but they agreed not to debate it in elections and the third miracle … that they kept their promise.”
He was an instrumental force behind the Norwegian government’s decision to establish a national oil company, StatOil, and an independent industry regulator.
The government also legislated that Norway’s participation, through Statoil, in all future discoveries should be no less than 50 per cent. Al-Kasim says that stipulation was actually welcomed by international oil companies, who remained keen to partner with Statoil.
“They were guaranteed recovery of their investment,” he explained. “And on top of that, they received a very reasonable interest on their investment …. There was virtually no risk at all, so the oil companies were quite happy going along with this formula.” (Source CBC.ca)
Gaa! It’s so awesome my province is so frakking high on capitalism. I found the 10 Oil Commandments from the Norwegian Governments website. So get a pencil and paper you feckless-amoral-conservative-corporate-bootlicking-lickspittles and look at how you establish resource policy that benefits the people of nation and not just corporate coffers.
The standing committee on industry in the Storting (parliament) produced what has since been known as the “10 oil commandments” in 1971. These principles have subsequently been significant for the direction and shape of Norwegian petroleum policy. Veteran industry observer Bjørn Vidar Lerøen checks out their impact.
The committee framed its commandments in keeping with a government desire to develop an oil policy which ensured that the natural resources on the NCS benefited the whole community.
First commandment
National supervision and control must be ensured for all operations on the NCS.
Coment
This principle can be regarded as fulfilled. The government wanted to manage and control the business. When creating Statoil and the NPD in 1972, the Storting established a tripartite model comprising central management, administrative and commercial functions.
These three instruments of this model were the Ministry of Industry – replaced by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy in 1978 – the NPD and Statoil respectively.
In 1984, the Storting resolved to split Statoil’s cash flow through the creation of the state’s direct financial interest (SDFI) in the petroleum industry. The company kept the job of managing the state’s licence holdings and selling its oil and gas.
Two new state-owned companies were founded when Statoil was listed in 2001 – Petoro to manage the SDFI portfolio and Gassco to operate the gas transport network from fields on the NCS. Statoil is the main technical service provider to the latter.
Changes have also happened to the NPD, with the Storting voting in 2004 to separate off the safety department as the Petroleum Safety Authority Norway (PSA).
The audits conducted by this agency take full care of the desire for national management and control of all operations on the NCS.
Second commandment
Petroleum discoveries must be exploited in a way which makes Norway as independent as possible of others for its supplies of crude oil.
Coment
When Ekofisk was discovered in late 1969, most Norwegians thought it would make them selfsufficient in oil for 15-20 years. But it soon became apparent that resources on the NCS far exceeded Norway’s own needs.
The country accordingly became a major exporter of crude oil, and is now in the process of becoming an even bigger source of gas exports. Norway will be independent of oil imports for the foreseeable future.
Third commandment
New industry will be developed on the basis of petroleum.
Coment
Offshore operations on the NCS have led to the development of a large and strong Norwegian petroleum industry, which currently employs some 200 000 people.
Norway has secured a position among the world leaders in important technologies such as drilling, major offshore projects, subsea solutions and multiphase flow in pipelines.
Norwegian oil and gas technology has also become a substantial export commodity.
Fourth commandment
The development of an oil industry must take necessary account of existing industrial activities and the protection of nature and the environment.
Coment
Oil and gas have made Norway one of the world’s richest countries. This wealth has been counterbalanced by a high level of domestic costs. Through 40 years as an oil nation, its industrial structure has also undergone profound changes.
Petroleum revenues have allowed Norway at times to pursue a counter-cyclical economic policy which has made the country unique in relation to comparable nations.
Reserves of more than NOK 3 000 billion have been accumulated in the government pension fund – global, and Norway has also been able to respond to the recent world financial crisis with measures which have ensured low unemployment and reasonable income growth.
During Norway’s years as a petroleum producer, climate and the environment have come to attract much greater attention. Being a major oil and gas nation while also seeking to lead work on improving climate and the environment has often proved a demanding combination.
On the other hand, Norwegian petroleum production can be described as among the cleanest in a global context.
Fifth commandment
Flaring of exploitable gas on the NCS must not be accepted except during brief periods of testing.
Coment
This principle has been indicative for resource management, and complying with it has meant that environmental concerns are met while creating substantial value.
Sixth commandment
Petroleum from the NCS must as a general rule be landed in Norway, except in those cases where socio-political considerations dictate a different solution.
Coment
This proved a difficult commandment to fulfil. The oil and gas pipelines for first two developments on the NCS, Ekofisk and Frigg, had to go to Germany and the UK, with landfalls at Emden, Teesside and St Fergus.
This was because the deepwater Norwegian Trench lies between the fields and mainland Norway. So crossing this feature in 360 metres of water with the Statpipe gas line during the early 1980s marked a major breakthrough.
That installation went to Kårstø north of Stavanger. Later gas pipelines have come ashore at Kollsnes, Nyhamna, Tjeldbergodden and Melkøya, while oil lines run to Sture and Mongstad.
A network more than 7 000 kilometres long gives Norway the world’s largest underwater gas transport system.
Seventh commandment
The state must become involved at all appropriate levels and contribute to a coordination of Norwegian interests in Norway’s petroleum industry as well as the creation of an integrated oil community which sets its sights both nationally and internationally.
Coment
This principle is perhaps the one which has been most fully implemented, as confirmed by Norway’s role as a leading oil and gas nation. (See under the first commandment above.)
Eighth commandment
A state oil company will be established which can look after the government’s commercial interests and pursue appropriate collaboration with domestic and foreign oil interests.
Coment
This commandment was complied with immediately through the creation of Statoil, which became an important element in the Norwegian model of oil industry governance. However, major revisions have occurred along the way (see under the first commandment above).
Unlike a number of other oil nations, Norway was never tempted to pure nationalisation. Competition on the NCS ensured the participation of the world’s leading technology specialists.
Ninth commandment
A pattern of activities must be selected north of the 62nd parallel which reflects the special socio-political conditions prevailing in that part of the country.
Coment
“Special socio-political conditions” were interpreted as both domestic and foreign policy concerns. From the start, Norwegian politicians appreciated that petroleum operations in the far north could be sensitive, primarily in relation to Russia.
A number of commentators argued that the far northern NCS should be reserved for Norwegian oil companies.
After four decades of negotiation, the biggest issue – the boundary between Norway and Russia in the Barents Sea – is now heading for a resolution.
The domestic policy dimension related to the desire that northern Norway should share in the value creation provided by its own resources. Development of the Snøhvit gas field with a pipeline to Melkøya outside Hammerfest represents a paradigm shift for the region.
Debate on opening areas of the Norwegian Sea off Lofoten and Vesterålen to oil activity has exposed something of the vulnerability of these northern waters to pollution threats.
The environmental movement has warned of a tougher fight against petroleum operations in these areas than they pursued earlier over the activities further south on the NCS.
Tenth commandment
Large Norwegian petroleum discoveries could present new tasks for Norway’s foreign policy.
Coment
Former foreign minister Thorvald Stoltenberg – father of current premier Jens Stoltenberg – once formulated the challenge as follows: “We must ensure that oil policy is given a foreign policy dimension, and [vice versa].”
That might sound like something which goes without saying, but nevertheless represented an important acknowledgement of the position.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…