You are only proving my point that we live in a blatantly sexist world.

It is one of the saddest things in my life that more than 40 years after we as women (and enlightened men) started having the conversation about how denigrating it is for full grown women to be referred as girls -- and to simper coyly and call ourselves girls -- that it is even worse now than it ever was.

And here you show up, making fun of a serious topic as if you have the least notion of what the heck you are talking about.

How often do you hear males over age 17-19 as being referred to as "boys"?

Take a moment as you move through the world and give it some attention. Women are girls, men are guys or men or dudes. See how often it happens that women are called ONLY girls. Maybe consider changing your language and use the word "woman" once in a while and see how your world view shifts.

That is, if you are open to learning something. If you have an open mind. If you don't think that you have achieved perfection in your thinking process and know absolutely everything there is to know is this vast world.

If you tell me that you routinely refer to grown men as "boys" and I'll back off on you personally. Some people do. That's great, I have no beef with them.

But if you aren't "equal" in your use of language, then yes, you and your female friends are blatantly sexist, and unconsciously so.

I first had this conversation in 1974. At that time, it wasn't uncommon to call a black man a boy -- getting rarer, but it wasn't uncommon. Yet here we are, calling grown women "girls."

Sad, sad, sad, sad.

And you "lol."

Even sadder.

The video, by the way, has a great payoff at the end of a rambling conversation.

By the way, I just looked up and saw #28 on the list of videos expiring soon. "Anal Cunt 'I respect your feelings as Woman.' " Another thing that saddens me. Coon, nigger, spook, jiggabo -- all verboten. But Cunt? Used now more than ever.

Saddens me.






>> ^packo:

didn't watch the vid, didn't really care... the only thing that caught my interest was that calling women "girls" is blatant sexism... that made me laugh
primarily because more women i know refer to themselves in different ways as "girls" than guys refer to them
is this a new "n word"? lol

It's funny you should pick out Gandhi and Lennon. Steve Jobs took an influential trip to India in 1974 (one which affected his life outlook in lots of ways, and one for which Gandhi, I would imagine, serves as an emblematic figure), and he was a big fan of The Beatles, both musically and organizationally: "My model for business is The Beatles: They were four guys that kept each other's negative tendencies in check; they balanced each other. And the total was greater than the sum of the parts."

I totally dig your point, generally applied; lots of ads strike me as disingenuous and (emotionally) opportunistic. I like this particular ad, though. To me it comes off, at least in part, as more of a personal (and genuine) homage to some of the people who inspired Steve Jobs at various points in his life.>> ^kymbos:

This captures beautifully what fills me with fear and loathing for people who invest their lives in marketing. Fucking Ghandi, brought to you by Apple? It makes me sick to my stomach, the gall of it. John Lennon, for fuck's sakes. Have you no shame?
And yet I know how many clever, intelligent, morally bewildering people spend their lives trying to make me feel something for companies, and probably succeed against my best intentions.

This ain't his first rodeo.>> ^L0cky:

shinyblurry, you're such a geek Pulling out relevant bible quotes on demand.
It reminds me of sports commentators: "The last time that happened was when the Meercats defeated the Tunafish in 1974!".

shinyblurry, you're such a geek Pulling out relevant bible quotes on demand.

It reminds me of sports commentators: "The last time that happened was when the Meercats defeated the Tunafish in 1974!".

Tags for this video have been changed from '1974, don, cornelius, michael, tito, funk, 70s' to '1974, don cornelius, michael, tito, funk, 70s, soul train' - edited by Grimm

Yeah I remember them from the 80's and kind of remember knowing that they existed in the 70's but wasn't familiar with anything from pre 80's. I think this is the first time I've seen them perform from that era...I think this is from 1974.>> ^Stormsinger:

Wow! I'd managed to completely wipe this band from my memory. Except for the keyboard player, anyway.
Now I've got to start all over again....

My parents took me to see Roy Clark, Boots Randolph and Floyd Cramer live at the Civic Audiotorium when I was about twelve (1974). It was great, those guys were fantastic musicians and put on a great show. I was amazed that these guys were real first class performers, so fun to watch. I just couldnt tell any of my friends that I actually liked it.

Good talk NR. I'm not convinced.... there are cabinet appointments, etc. he's made that make me not trust him, but I am listening. Ob's speech a couple days ago has me wondering you've got a direct line to him or something.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
>> ^Truckchase:

I know where you're coming from and I don't disagree with your logic, but I'm not gonna get out there and campaign for or vocally support Obama because I do think his administration is still heavily corrupted by (mainly) the financial industry. As you point out he's not nearly as bad as the repubs, so unless by some miracle Buddy Roemer gets any real traction I'll most likely be voting for Obama and running from the polling place in a ankle length trench coat and hat like a family man from 1974 escaping the newsstand with a smut rag.

Oy, Buddy Roemer? The problem with Buddy Roemer is that he seems to think his becoming President is the only/main way to fix the problem with money in politics. Never mind that the biggest problem with campaign finance law is that a) Republicans always oppose it and b) the Supreme Court has deemed real campaign finance law unconstitutional.

The answer to that is a Constitutional Amendment, not giving Buddy Roemer the potential ability to appoint SCOTUS judges, especially since he'd only get to replace liberals in a 2013-2017 term, not roadblocks like Thomas, Scalia, or Roberts.

I personally don't think silent support is good enough. I'm gonna be out campaigning for Obama nice and loud. I'm especially going to be pushing back against what I see as crazy misinformation, like the story Cenk is pushing here.

Once you strip away the misinformation, the only legitimate liberal complaints I've heard about Obama boil down to "he didn't do enough to make things better" as opposed to "he made something worse". People seem to have rather quickly forgotten the width and breadth of the damage done by Bush and a Republican congress.

Most people just remember the wars, the Patriot Act, and the tax cuts. Fewer people remember the US Attorneys scandal, fewer people remember the way he gutted the SEC, put the EPA on hold, sabotaged the FEC, tried to gut the FCC, turned the NLRB into a union-busting department, and so on. It was a nonstop deluge of sabotage, fraud, and abuse that just went on and on relentlessly for eight fucking years.

It grates me that it's only partially and often only temporarily being undone by Obama, but now those low-publicity nitty-gritty detail stories are almost universally good ones.

The choice isn't really one of a "lesser of two evils" it's a choice between empowering an enemy who's sworn to destroy everything you hold dear, or empowering a friend who's let you down. I see this as a choice between feckless and imperfect good, or pure, ruthless evil.

>> ^Truckchase:

I know where you're coming from and I don't disagree with your logic, but I'm not gonna get out there and campaign for or vocally support Obama because I do think his administration is still heavily corrupted by (mainly) the financial industry. As you point out he's not nearly as bad as the repubs, so unless by some miracle Buddy Roemer gets any real traction I'll most likely be voting for Obama and running from the polling place in a ankle length trench coat and hat like a family man from 1974 escaping the newsstand with a smut rag.

Oy, Buddy Roemer? The problem with Buddy Roemer is that he seems to think his becoming President is the only/main way to fix the problem with money in politics. Never mind that the biggest problem with campaign finance law is that a) Republicans always oppose it and b) the Supreme Court has deemed real campaign finance law unconstitutional.

The answer to that is a Constitutional Amendment, not giving Buddy Roemer the potential ability to appoint SCOTUS judges, especially since he'd only get to replace liberals in a 2013-2017 term, not roadblocks like Thomas, Scalia, or Roberts.

I personally don't think silent support is good enough. I'm gonna be out campaigning for Obama nice and loud. I'm especially going to be pushing back against what I see as crazy misinformation, like the story Cenk is pushing here.

Once you strip away the misinformation, the only legitimate liberal complaints I've heard about Obama boil down to "he didn't do enough to make things better" as opposed to "he made something worse". People seem to have rather quickly forgotten the width and breadth of the damage done by Bush and a Republican congress.

Most people just remember the wars, the Patriot Act, and the tax cuts. Fewer people remember the US Attorneys scandal, fewer people remember the way he gutted the SEC, put the EPA on hold, sabotaged the FEC, tried to gut the FCC, turned the NLRB into a union-busting department, and so on. It was a nonstop deluge of sabotage, fraud, and abuse that just went on and on relentlessly for eight fucking years.

It grates me that it's only partially and often only temporarily being undone by Obama, but now those low-publicity nitty-gritty detail stories are almost universally good ones.

The choice isn't really one of a "lesser of two evils" it's a choice between empowering an enemy who's sworn to destroy everything you hold dear, or empowering a friend who's let you down. I see this as a choice between feckless and imperfect good, or pure, ruthless evil.

>> ^NetRunner:

@Truckchase I know I'm a week late in replying, but I've been sick as a dog, as well as tied up in holiday activities.
I think you and I are in agreement. I think money in politics is a bad thing, and OWS is a really good thing. I'm not throwing rocks at the movement, I'm throwing rocks at liberals saying something along the lines of "I'm never voting Democratic again, #OWS4eva!" as if the protests have somehow made the concept of traditional political action irrelevant.
I do worry that Occupy ends up becoming a movement largely led by people who've totally given up on participating in the election process, and are holding out for some sort of Tahrir Square-style revolution.
Basically, I agree with what Matt Yglesias says here. Who wins elections matters, a lot. OWS is gonna need to back somebody (or better yet, many somebodies) in the 2012 election, or nothing they want to see happen will happen.

Glad you're feeling better NR. I know where you're coming from and I don't disagree with your logic, but I'm not gonna get out there and campaign for or vocally support Obama because I do think his administration is still heavily corrupted by (mainly) the financial industry. As you point out he's not nearly as bad as the repubs, so unless by some miracle Buddy Roemer gets any real traction I'll most likely be voting for Obama and running from the polling place in a ankle length trench coat and hat like a family man from 1974 escaping the newsstand with a smut rag.


Or to cut to the chase:

I think it's important (at least for now) that we silently support whoever we may view as the "lesser of two evils" while maintaining our hopefully long term momentum to overhaul the entire campaign finance system. #rootsrikers

How does this enhance liberty in any way?

It increases the probability that the people who are legally authorized to vote are voting (meaning no illegals and no Chicagoans voting twice).

It's just not an impressive video, gang. Yeah, there are weird exceptions all over the place, but I'm sure "somehow" most of these people have no trouble getting a government check of some kind, so why is it so damned hard for them to get a new ID? Wheeling poor Gladys out of the retirement castle, who hasn't a current ID or owned a calendar since 1974, is not a good example of a conspiracy.

The kollij student is the most baffling. He can't vote in Texas because he'll lose his grants, but isn't he a citizen of another state? He votes in THAT state, just like military members vote based on their declared home state.

Legal angle aside, how many of these people are really informed enough to vote? After 60 years of government schools, virtually none.

B. Franklin's warning is now a full-on curse: we're getting the (shit) government we deserve.




>> ^alcom:

How does this enhance liberty in any way? Why would you want to infringe on the voting rights of university students living in dorms out of their home state? Sounds like someone doesn't want the educated to vote and based on the casual million thrown donated to ALEC by the Brothers Coch, one doesn't need a degree to make the connection.
>> ^quantumushroom:
If there weren't 12 to 20 million illegals here (voting taxocrat) there'd be no need for tighter controls.

Definitely an amazing song - There's no doubt Dolly Parton has more talent on the inside than she has on the outside - and that's saying something!

(For those that don't know: "Jolene" is a song written and performed by Dolly Parton from her album Jolene (1974), produced by Bob Ferguson. It is ranked #217 on the Rolling Stone magazine's list of "the 500 Greatest Songs of All Time". - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jolene_%28song%29)

Well, that was an easy one to disprove. Via Wikipedia:

Riots in the 1970s
1970 - Kent State shootings, May 1970, (Kent, Ohio, United States)
1970 - Hard Hat riot, Wall Street, May 8, 1970, (New York City, New York, United States)
1970 - Harakat Tahrir riots, June 17, 1970 El-Aaiun[citation needed]
1970 - Falls Curfew (Belfast, Northern Ireland on 3–5 July 1970)
1970 - Fatti di Reggio, July 1970, (Reggio Calabria, Italy)
1970 - Koza riot, December 20, (Ryukyu Islands, United States, later Okinawa Prefecture, Japan)
1971 - May Day Protests 1971, May 1971, (Washington, D.C., United States)
1971 - 1971 Springbok tour (Australia)
1971 - Camden Riots, August 1971, (Camden, New Jersey, United States)
1971 - Operation Demetrius (Northern Ireland on August 9–11, 1971)
1971 - Attica Prison uprising, (Attica, New York, United States)
1971 - Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
1972 - Bloody Sunday (Derry, Northern Ireland on 30 January 1972)
1972 - Operation Motorman (Northern Ireland on 31 July 1972)
1973 and 1974 - Athens Polytechnic uprising, Greek student riots and revolution at National Technical University of Athens, military junta overthrown, (Greece)
1973 - Oklahoma State Penitentiary Prison Riot, (McAlester, Oklahoma, United States)[citation needed]
1973 - Ageo incident, Tokyo Metropolitan Railways Riot,(Tokyo and Saitama, April 1973)[citation needed]
1974 - Cherry Blossom Festival at the Richmond Stadium, (Richmond, Virginia, United States)[citation needed]
1974 - Ulster Workers' Council strike (Northern Ireland, May 1974)
1974 - Ten Cent Beer Night, (Cleveland, Ohio, United States, June 4, 1974)
1975 - Chapeltown riot Leeds, West Yorkshire ,England
1975 - Nieuwmarkt riot, March - April 1975 (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
1975 - Livernois-Fenkell riot (Detroit, Michigan, United States)
1975 - European cup Final 1975, Leeds United riot in Paris
1976 - Vitoria Riots, March 3 (Vitoria, Basque Country, Spain)
1976 - Kobe Festival Riot by motorcycle gangs (Bōsōzoku), May 15 in Japan
1976 - Notting Hill Carnival Riot (London, England)
1976 - Soweto Riots (Soweto, South Africa)
1977 - 1977 Egyptian Bread Riots, January, 1977, (Egypt)
1977 - New York City Blackout riot, July 1977, (New York City, United States)
1977 - Sri Lankan riots of 1977, (Sri Lanka)
1978 - Rameeza Bee Riots, (Hyderabad, India)
1979 - Disco Demolition Night, (Chicago, Illinois, United States)
1979 - White Night gay riots, May 1979 (San Francisco, California)
1979 - Greensboro Riot/Shootings, Nov. 1979, (Greensboro, North Carolina, United States)
1979 - Southall Riots, (Southall, West London, England)

>> ^quantumushroom:

Of course, watching an atheist angered by a lack of morality in the populace is hilarious. People didn't regularly act this way 40 years ago. What changed?
Not everyone proclaiming to be a Christian follows Thou shalt not steal all the time, but more of them have values than the ones raised with....NOTHING.


So what's the reason that all these god-fearing, morally-informed-with-superior-'Christian'-values people engaged in riots? Ummm... maybe it is because the proximate causes of a riot are based on economic and societal conditions and not prevented by a 2000 year old book. Also worth noting in the list is included Bloody Sunday, which, if I remember correctly, was part of a conflict based on rival gangs within your beloved Christianity kicking the shit out of each other.

Interesting You know, your visit could well have coincided with the time frame I was talking about listening to "And the band played..." in music class. I'm not entirely sure why the band played Waltzing Matilda (but that link might have some clues). In 1918 the real Australian anthem was "God save the King", our current one wasn't chosen until 1974, but I think Matilda has always been popular. The link to Gallipoli is interesting too. After the war, Mustafa Kemal, who had been commander of the Turkish forces on the day of the invasion wrote a tribute to the Australian troops quoted at the Australian war memorial's web site, http://www.awm.gov.au/encyclopedia/ataturk.asp

"Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives... You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side now here in this country of ours... you, the mothers, who sent their sons from faraway countries wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land. They have become our sons as well."

P.S. I got side tracked and forgot that I meant to send you a link to "I was only 19", another sad Australian ballad about returned soldiers.
In reply to this comment by AdrianBlack:
I've known it was sort of the un-official national anthem for Australia since I was little (I was there when I was 9yrs old), so I guess I've always heard it in an Australian voice.
I also had a music box as a child that had Waltzing Matilda as it's song.

How well known it is to others, I don't know. I always seem to be the one that collects odd little facts.

Lol, nice accent, btw.

Cheerio!

>> ^NicoleBee:

I heard a version of this sort of joke a long time ago involving a conversation between a missionary and an Innu.


Yeah the joke actually dates back to 1974. From "Pilgrim at Tinker Creek" by Anne Dillard.

The quote:
Somewhere, and I can't find where, I read about an Eskimo hunter who asked the local missionary preist, "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?" "No," said the preist, "not if you did not know." "Then why," asked the Eskimo earnestly, "did you tell me?"