bao: (amused)
You know, I'm thinking that "wank" is just one of those evolving words, like "soulbond", that totally didn't mean three years ago what it means now. Once upon a time, post comment threads could consist of something other than vague target-bashing that's supposed to be witty but mistakes wit for acid. Not that it has to be positive, but seriously? There are more amusing ways to make fun of something or somebody than to go "ZOMG STUPID BINT SHOULD DIE NOW LOL DEAD FROM COKE IZ PASTEDE ON YEY".

So, "wank" once meant masturbation, then humorous self-importance, and now has devolved to mean anything set up for mass mockery that fails to be humorous AT ALL 99.999999% of the time, because no one's really putting any effort, thought, or consideration into it. Sarcasm isn't always funny. Heck, judging from most examples of Impromptu Snark Humor, most of it isn't. (I wonder if this is why oldtimers were always complaining about newbies.)

I did get some good advice that time around in [ profile] poetryslamming, if you exclude the useless one-word potshots. And heck, after a while of bashing heads in [ profile] religiousdebate, those one-word potshots are downright cuddly. So I might take another try sometime with this journal. That is, if the mod doesn't still think I'm [ profile] naienko or that she was a sockpuppet of mine. You'd think that her replies all being quotes from Pope and mine being actual direct replies to the comments with good criticism would tip people off, but. Then again, we'd both have been technically "trolling", right? (There's a question. If take it seriously and aren't being an ass to anyone, are you a troll? Or a disgrace to wankers everywhere?)

Maybe sarcastic humor has passed its prime. I wonder what would happen if everyone let it rest and tried, say, Dada for while, or least tried to say something funny WITHOUT using "stupid", a synonym of "stupid", statement of innate unchangeable inferiority, or statement that someone should "get off the planet" (or internet, or what). Remember "the wank is coming from inside the house"? Well. Have fun with the endless unexplained injokes, at least.
bao: (disappointed)
This post is in response to this lovely argument.

There is no shame in retreat. If the problem was that one man, or one government administration, was responsible for the mess we're in, then I would insist on staying and fighting for things to change. But when problems are actually the result of a massive societal shift, that's when fighting to change things looks a bit more like trying to battle a tidal wave. Even if you have a power equal or near equal to that of the wave, it's going to be messy for both sides, and definitely will have repercussions for decades and even centuries to come.

So, I don't mind it when people get pissed and say "Well, if you're going to turn tail and run, GET OUT. WE DON'T NEED COWARDS!" Because, to be quite frank, there's a very fine line between being brave and being stupid.

Besides, and this is a point that many people forget, if someone chooses to live in the U.S., they have as much right to choose to live somewhere else. And if they didn't choose to live in the U.S. (i.e., a native-born citizen), what kind of ridiculous argument would give such a person any real responsibility for a country that was imposed upon them by sheer chance? It's right out nonsensical to go around saying "You can't leave this country! You have to stick to it no matter what because you were born within the confines of United States borders!"

In other words, immigrants have the right to change their minds, and native-born citizens have the right to choose.
bao: (amused)
I personally think this is an excellent idea.

Also, I have a new theme song. [ profile] karinofujo is amazed, because she'd expect me to pick something cool and badass and instead I pick... well, listen to it and you'll see. No comprehension of Japanese necessary.

That said, the issue of whether or not to emigrate and where to have been pretty much settled. Now it's just a matter of when and whether to apply for citizenship first. I say that governmental aid is well worth a tiny delay, so long as Shrub keeps in mind that about half of the country wanted him out and doesn't parade around like his usual pseudo-Texan self.

No, no, I do mean pseudo-Texan. The man was born, raised, and educated in New England: specifically Connecticut (his real home state) and Massachusetts, though Maine figures heavily as well. The first records of his ever having anything to do with Texas would be the Arbusto Oil Company, which failed miserably. Not only that, but the first time he ran for governor of Texas, he lost to a native Southerner that played up the "Good Ol' Boy vs. Northern Carpetbagger" element of the campaign. The next time he ran, he borrowed the "Good Ol' Boy" persona for himself, even adopting a fake Texas accent to seal it all in. He's never lost a race since.

In other words, the President's public personality is completely fabricated, and a good chunk of the people in his country have bought it hook, line, and sinker. The whole "nook-yoo-lur" thing is likely part of this. He's a Northerner party boy trying to disguise his willful ignorance as stereotypical blue collar "simplicity".

And if you don't believe me, please find a video of the 3rd Presidental Debate. Watch it in full, paying very close attention to Bush and his answers, and then, please explain to me why the President's accent suddenly vanished. If there's a good reason behind that, I'd love to hear it.
bao: (amused)
Those of you who had business in the city of Saratoga this afternoon may have noticed a guy walking around with a noticeable limp and a giant stupid grin on his face. That would have been me. Which is to say, I sprained a muscle in the most pleasant way possible. I would offer to let you guess how, or even where the sprain is, but most of you are probably thinking "Ohhhh, he did THAT again," anyway.

What can I say? I live dangerously.

On losers and fending off ultra-Christian admirers )

I wish that pizzeria around the corner actually delivered. It'd make life a lot easier.
bao: (amused)
I just made an ethical debate community: [ profile] necessarytactic. The interests are a bit politically centered right now, but it's not really meant to be a political community per se. It's just that most of the debate communities I'm running into seem to hold fast to the idea that everyone can have their cake and eat it too, when reality isn't like that most of the time. There's rarely, if ever, going to be a standard religion or politician or economic policy that will match your own beliefs perfectly, and because of that, people have to make educated compromises. Hence, [ profile] necessarytactic is for those who want to make sure that they're compromising in the way they intend to.

It's almost bordering on adversarial advice, really.

Of course, now comes the hard part: getting people to join. Oi.
bao: (disappointed)
So, I was lurking on [ profile] religiousdebate, and came across this lovely soundbite:

D)Are you suggesting that abortion decreases children born of incest?

Yes. A fetus made through incest should be aborted, always.

And I have to admit, even though I am extremely pro-choice, this made me stop and go "WHUT." But commenting there would more or less necro the over-2-weeks-old post, which is entirely stupid. So you get this instead!

Run away! It's an abortion rant! RUN NOW BEFORE CTHULHU EATS YOUR SOUL )

You'll notice I don't use the term "fetus". That's because it doesn't apply to the first trimester, when it's technically still an embryo, and also, I consider it a child from the point of conception onward. Which has absolutely no effect on my support of abortion, by the way.

If I was to explain the logic behind most of my views on ethics and morality, I think it would make most people's heads implode.
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 09:14 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios