"And this is the re-invented Superbowl Sunday....where nobody wants to go to parties anymore and pretend to enjoy football, their so-called friends, or even the adverts, over sitting at home in their soiled computer chairs trolling tired blogs and surfing porn."

I enjoyed your trendy video offer there top-gun, keep on truckin'!

^ I was into Beezow Doo Doo Zopitty bop Bop Bop back before it went trendy, poser.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CodmlmxpZeQ

>> ^therealblankman:

>> ^direpickle:
>> ^therealblankman:
Vancouver was recently named the third worst-dressed city in the entire world, behind only Maui Hawaii and Orlando Florida (shudder). Why you may ask? One word... lululemon.
http://travel.ca.msn.com/photogallery.aspx?cp-documentid=30567563&
amp;page=8
canada, viral, commercial

That's insane. I am totally digging the yoga pants fad. Just because some people can't wear them doesn't mean no one should!

It's all about what's appropriate to wear in any given situation. Yoga pants are inappropriate anywhere but the gym. Just as it's inappropriate to wear Spandex bicycle shorts unless you are actually riding a bicycle, or to wear Speedo trunks unless you are actually swimming. Imagine running into me at some trendy bullshit over-priced coffee bar in Kitsilano (I'm looking at you, Cafe Artigiano!) and I'm wearing my Speedos!
Yes I own a pair of Speedos, and yes I can pull off that look .


Whats appropriate to wear in any given situation is what you feel comfortable in or what you want to wear. Anyone telling you different need to mind their own business and find something better to do with their time. I do understand the requirements of a dress code for work but anything else is my decision. If ya don't like it tough. So called "fashion police" will be beaten and thrown to the sloths.

>> ^direpickle:

>> ^therealblankman:
Vancouver was recently named the third worst-dressed city in the entire world, behind only Maui Hawaii and Orlando Florida (shudder). Why you may ask? One word... lululemon.
http://travel.ca.msn.com/photogallery.aspx?cp-documentid=30567563&
amp;page=8
canada, viral, commercial

That's insane. I am totally digging the yoga pants fad. Just because some people can't wear them doesn't mean no one should!


It's all about what's appropriate to wear in any given situation. Yoga pants are inappropriate anywhere but the gym. Just as it's inappropriate to wear Spandex bicycle shorts unless you are actually riding a bicycle, or to wear Speedo trunks unless you are actually swimming. Imagine running into me at some trendy bullshit over-priced coffee bar in Kitsilano (I'm looking at you, Cafe Artigiano!) and I'm wearing my Speedos!

Yes I own a pair of Speedos, and yes I can pull off that look .

I don't enjoy celebrity news, reality TV, chain stores, or trendy Apple products either. But I also don't feel any pressure to do so. At least, not from anyone other than advertisers. And who cares what advertisers think of you?

Hypothetically, @quantumushroom, what if there were a religion that stated that white people are the true master race? Would you support their right to preach this? Their right to tell black people that they should try to be white and to try to get Asian people to go to a correction school to bleach their skin? I don't see the push for gay rights as any different to that trendy Martin Luther King and his communist buddies.

The issue of free speech is an awkward one. I think you make a powerful argument against free speech but I do believe in free speech despite your worst efforts. I suppose the thing is that you can say what you like, but that doesn't mean you should. Maybe you can legally preach bigotry - and that's what you are doing - but you should think about what you're doing and stop doing it.

If you cite a study that refers to ethnic groups and apply it to a non-ethnic group, then that distinction means that you are talking absolute rubbish. That's not my distinction, that's the English language's distinction. Sadly, there isn't a world of difference between those who violently attacked homosexuals and those who preach against it. Of course the former is worse than the later, but they are 2 points on the same horrible scale.

I don't believe that bigotry is a right. If you have a religious objection to homosexuality, then don't engage in homosexual acts, but leave other people alone.

I am talking about tolerance for all things that people don't choose, be it race, sexuality, ability or even belief. Dismissing tolerance as "trendy" is meaningless, petty nonsense. Calling tolerance "communist" is meaningless petty nonsense, and claiming that I am calling everyone on the right a homophobe is a straw man argument because I'm not and I never have.

Did you read beyond the headline? "Asian Americans endure far more bullying at US schools than members of other ethnic group". "Gay" isn't an ethnic group.

This study wasn't done before the trendy gay anti-bullying campaign. As for "ethnic group" rubbish, only the left cares about such distinctions, for the purpose of divide and conquer, vote-buying and tribalism. And "Gay" is now officially a victimized group, political movement AND voting block.

The problem is that it is the LGBTs are the group most affected by this clause, "statement[s] of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction". No religion gets away with overt racism so abuse against Asian Americans doesn't have this escape clause. I very much doubt you can get away with claiming white supremacy as a religious belief or a moral conviction and you should not be able to get away with homophobia as a moral conviction either.

"Homophobia" is one of this delightful thoughtcrime control words terms made up by those suffering from homophilia. There's a world of difference between scum who violently attack others for being gay and stern but non-violent Christians who believe homosexuality is wrong for religious reasons. "Homophobia" is a word meant to lump both together. When I call anyone on the left a 'communist' I am closer to the truth than a liberal calling everyone on the right a 'homophobe'.

I don't think any other minority is as affected but if there is, then they shouldn't have abuse against them legitimised like this.

Leftists are the only ones making these ridiculous generalizations about the purpose of the religious clause. Would you see Christians go to jail for simply stating, "Homosexuality is wrong"? That's what they're doing up in Canada (or damned close to it).


>> ^Quboid:

Did you read beyond the headline? "Asian Americans endure far more bullying at US schools than members of other ethnic group". "Gay" isn't an ethnic group.
The problem is that it is the LGBTs are the group most affected by this clause, "statement[s] of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction". No religion gets away with overt racism so abuse against Asian Americans doesn't have this escape clause. I very much doubt you can get away with claiming white supremacy as a religious belief or a moral conviction and you should not be able to get away with homophobia as a moral conviction either.
I don't think any other minority is as affected but if there is, then they shouldn't have abuse against them legitimised like this.

You might want to read it more carefully:

"Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick identifies a continuum between homosociality and homosexuality, going as far as correlating feminism and lesbian desire: 'it is precisely this broad spectrum of women's homosocial loyalties that Adrienne Rich has referred to and celebrated as the "lesbian continuum"

and the connection from the other article:

7th century BC as an aspect of Greek homosocial culture,[5] which was characterized also by athletic and artistic nudity, delayed marriage for aristocrats, symposia, and the social seclusion of women.[6] The influence of pederasty was so pervasive that it has been called "the principal cultural model for free relationships between citizens."[7]"

There is a casaul relationship between the two, and the normalization of these kinds of behaviors led to the pederast society documented in greece





>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^shinyblurry:
You don't think there is any connection? It's a historically proven fact:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosociality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece
>> ^luxury_pie:
Way to go comparing apples with pedophiles @shinyblurry.
@quantumushroom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
not only the canucks, my dear troll.
>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.



"In Classical times there appears a note of concern that the institution of pederasty might give rise to a "morbid condition", adult homosexuality, that today's eromenos may become tomorrow's kinaidos, defined as the passive or "penetrated" partner."
Are you referring to this? Would you mind reading BOTH of these articles about the topic?
Would you please mind explaning where - by the power of the everlasting dragon hunting, snake exploding jeesus - you think there is any FACT of the correlation you were implying?
Let me help you with the reading part: "Homosociality, by definition, implies neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality."
Please help me with this?

>> ^shinyblurry:

You don't think there is any connection? It's a historically proven fact:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosociality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece
>> ^luxury_pie:
Way to go comparing apples with pedophiles @shinyblurry.
@quantumushroom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
not only the canucks, my dear troll.
>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.




"In Classical times there appears a note of concern that the institution of pederasty might give rise to a "morbid condition", adult homosexuality, that today's eromenos may become tomorrow's kinaidos, defined as the passive or "penetrated" partner."

Are you referring to this? Would you mind reading BOTH of these articles about the topic?
Would you please mind explaning where - by the power of the everlasting dragon hunting, snake exploding jeesus - you think there is any FACT of the correlation you were implying?

Let me help you with the reading part: "Homosociality, by definition, implies neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality."

Please help me with this?

You don't think there is any connection? It's a historically proven fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosociality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece

>> ^luxury_pie:
Way to go comparing apples with pedophiles @shinyblurry.
@quantumushroom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
not only the canucks, my dear troll.
>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.

Way to go comparing apples with pedophiles @shinyblurry.


@quantumushroom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
not only the canucks, my dear troll.
>> ^quantumushroom:

But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.

I don't condone bullying of any kind.

Nor do I, but you know what? Bullying still exists and must be dealt with, and this bullshit trendy law ain't doing it.

However, as Dan Savage has said repeatedly, the difference with gay kids is that they often go home to bullying, they go to church and are bullied. They are often thrown out onto the streets by their parents because they are gay.

It's sad and it's true, but an anti-bullying law at a government school isn't going to change it.

Asian kids don't face that. They go home to a place where it is safe to be Asian.

Safe to be Asian but maybe not to be a 'failure' with bad grades? And again, what law is supposed to measure suffering?


I think I am going to have to take a break from you, Q. I know you think you are "right", but lately it has gotten to be too much for me.

I am right. Everyone here believes they are right. I am just more right more of the time.

Catch you on the rebound.

Oh, I answered your other post. It'll be waiting for you when you get back.











>> ^bareboards2:

I don't condone bullying of any kind.
However, as Dan Savage has said repeatedly, the difference with gay kids is that they often go home to bullying, they go to church and are bullied. They are often thrown out onto the streets by their parents because they are gay.
Asian kids don't face that. They go home to a place where it is safe to be Asian.
I think I am going to have to take a break from you, Q. I know you think you are "right", but lately it has gotten to be too much for me.
Catch you on the rebound.

>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.

The data comes from a 2009 survey supported by the US Justice Department and Education Department which interviewed some 6,500 students from ages 12 to 18. Asian Americans are generally defined as tracing ancestry to East Asia, the Indian subcontinent or the South Pacific.

Argue that these guys are 'stupid'. And while you're at it, where's your statistical counter-proof that you know what the fuck YOU'RE talking about?


>> ^Yogi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.

I think the left is concerned with Bullying in all forms. This bill however doesn't say "You can bully asians kids if you're bad at math" it's giving an out for people who want to beat up gay kids.
Bullying is wrong, as you pointed out. How could you disagree with bullying is wrong unless you've got a REALLY GOOD (Religious) Reason?
EDIT: Also you're actually wrong, anyone who's taking a statistics class can see that those numbers are incorrect. So not only were you wrong in principle, you're wrong on the facts. Thanks again for proving how stupid you are.

I don't condone bullying of any kind.

However, as Dan Savage has said repeatedly, the difference with gay kids is that they often go home to bullying, they go to church and are bullied. They are often thrown out onto the streets by their parents because they are gay.

Asian kids don't face that. They go home to a place where it is safe to be Asian.

I think I am going to have to take a break from you, Q. I know you think you are "right", but lately it has gotten to be too much for me.

Catch you on the rebound.


>> ^quantumushroom:

But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.