If the US had used directed weather as a weapon in Iraq, or breached levies to flood cities it would have been proper to laugh at the ironic disaster in New Orleans. Remember, the support for attacking the wrong country to retaliate for 9/11 was incredibly high (yes, thinly predicated on what are now known to be blatant lies…we didn’t care), we were not a nation of innocents…(I personally supported attacking Saidi Arabia and doing limited but overwhelming “police actions” in Afghanistan to completely destroy the actual perpetrators, then rebuild any collateral damage better and make friends, and never bought the rationale for invading Iraq beyond “they tried to kill my daddy”- GB…but who listens to me?)

I felt it was karma specifically balancing the universe for the Ukrainian dam they blew up in a terrorist action just over 2 months ago, not the continuing invasion of Ukraine that’s been ongoing and expanding continuously since 2014 when Ukrainian Crimea was invaded and “annexed” by Russia, a move seemingly universally applauded in Russia.

I think there’s delicious schadenfreude in the very religious country that continues to support repeated violent genocidal expansionism against peaceful neighbors thinly predicated on blatant lies (but that support is waning slightly as the war and truth comes home), the aggressor nation that among numerous war crimes intentionally destroyed a major dam to sew chaos destruction and death as they retreated from portions of Ukraine and set forest fires for the same reason having to deal with forest fires and dam failures as “acts of god”, not even from military retaliation.

I do feel a bit bad for the individuals and families if reports of 12 dead are true (it’s Russian news, so likely untrue), but that number is dwarfed by those intentionally killed in their names by the dam destruction in Ukraine.

Agreed on the narration…it was the only coverage I found at the time….well, there was this but even I found it in bad taste…

He is, but he is clear that he thinks Islam is the worst, most violent misogynistic and intolerant. I say that’s equally true of all religions at different times.

While I do like that he can see when his team goes off the deep end, where that line lies has steadily moved to the right as he aged. I’ve been watching him since before he had a tv show. I live in CA, and I don’t have the issues he complains most about….of course I don’t live in the most expensive, most regulated county in CA like he does. He complained for years about getting permits for his solar system and blamed the liberal government, I got my permits in one day with no issue at all.

My biggest peeve is that, even though he’s been a professional comedian for over 40 years, he still doesn’t understand that a groan/clap is approval for a joke in bad taste or particularly pointed. It bugs the shit out of me when he gets mad his crowd groaned while applauding and laughing.

We actually started HBO to watch him there…but he’s changed so much we often don’t bother anymore. I rarely recognize his panel anymore too. New Rules is definitely the highlight of the show these days.

Im unsure how I feel about this so far. I get that "celebrating the attack" = bad. But it was meant as a memorial, I've never been to a pleasant memorial, and some of them do show people being attacked.


https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/nurses-memorial-vietnam-war-memorial-in-washington-dc-ruth-hager.jpg


https://www.legion.org/sites/legion.org/files/memorial-photos/IMG_0074.JPG

https://www.newsherald.com/storyimage/DA/20190123/NEWS/190129403/AR/0/AR-190129403.jpg

I'm not sure exactly what is in bad taste about this. I see many war memorials where soldiers have either been attacked or in the middle of being attacked. I don't see the distinction between the buildings and the soldiers.

Yeah...it was a bad joke based on similar statements said in all seriousness by right wing representatives bragging about how easy they made development, and how much they were pro business. Now that deaths are reported, I retracted it. I thought the building was empty when I wrote it.
That said, if it is a 'failure to meet code' issue, then at least the 'code enforcement' part would be on point, even if in extremely bad taste.

12 cm is huge if only some parts sank and others didn't. That's why I always found downtown Houston scary, all those high rises built before 90 are sinking at different rates. They have tunnels connecting some that were flat when built and now are all ramps, some too steep to use! Yikes!

The water was added in post production, the rat is covered with bad tasting soap and is trying to brush it off without grooming normally (because licking it would taste horrible).

Done in bad taste but not worth all this venting by the left.

@ChaosEngine
agreed.
context matters and i think being a decent human being plays a large role in that dynamic.

people tend to attempt to break down complex ideas and/or ideologies into more easily digestible morsels.this "twitter speak",in my opinion,is largely responsible for the decay of human interactions.

we all are biased.
we all hold prejudices,and preconceptions based on our learned experiences.
which are subjective.

we see the world through the lens of our own subjectivity and even the most open minded and non-judgemental person,when trying to sympathize/empathize with another person, will use their own subjective understandings in order to understand that person.

this tactic,which we all employ,will almost always fall short of true understanding.

so we rely on words,metaphors,allegory etc etc in order to communicate fairly complex emotions and experiences.

what brendon o'neill is pointing out,is that when we start to restrict words as acceptable and unacceptable,we infantilize our interactions.

words are inert.
they are simply symbols representing a thing,action or emotion.
it is WE who apply the deeper meanings by way of our subjective lens.

i am not trying to make something simple complicated,but bear with me.
a rock will always be a rock,but a cunt has a totally different meaning here in the states than in britain.(love you brits,and cunt is a brilliant word).

the problems of culture,region,nationality or race all play a role in not only how we communicate but how that communication is received ...and interpreted.

so misunderstandings can happen quite easily,and then when we consider that the persons intent is by far the greatest metric to judge the veracity of the words being spoken,and just how difficult it is to discern that intent....this is where nuance and context play such a major role,but we need to have as many tools in our language box to express oftentimes very difficult concepts,multi-layered emotions and complicated ideologies.

and,unfortunately,there are attempts to legislate speech.

of course well intentioned,and reasonable sounding,but like any legislation dealing with the subjective nature of humans,has the possibility of abuse.

case in point:http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/

a new canadian addendum to their human rights statute.on the surface this is a fairly benign addition to canadas already existing human rights laws,but there is the possibility of abuse.

a psychology professor from university of toronto was critical of this new addendum,and has created a flurry of controversy in regards to his criticism.

which you can check out here:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/301661-this-canadian-prof-defied-sjw-on-gender-pronouns-and-has-a

now he was protested,received death threats,there was even violence and a new internet star was born affectionately labeled "smugglypuff".

see:http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/smugglypuff

i agree that free speech cannot be viewed with an absolutist mindset.absolutist thinking leads to stagnation and a self-righteous fundamentalism,so we NEED the free flow of ideas...even BAD ideas..even offensive and racist..because this brings all those feelings/thoughts/ideologies into the market of ideas to be either absorbed or ridiculed and ultimately ostracized for the shit philosophy they represent.

i WANT to know who the racists are.
i want to know who is bigoted or prejudiced.
i want to know who is holding on to stupid ideas,or promoting fascism dressed up as nationalistic pride.

and the only way to shine a light on these horrendous and detrimental ideas is to allow those who hold them openly state who and what they are...so we can criticize/challenge and in some cases..ridicule.

we should be free to say whatever we wish,but we are not free from challenge or criticism.
we can say whatever pops into our pretty little head,but we are not free from consequences.
we are also not free from offense.

i know this is long,and i hope you stayed with me,and if you did,thanks man.i know i tend to ramble.

but we can use the banning of gorillaman as a small microcosm of what we are talking about here.

i felt that we,as a community,could take gorilla to task for his poor choice in verbiage "nigger prince" and i attempted to make the case by using his history,dark humor and bad taste to add context to his poor choice of wording.

bareboards felt it was a matter for the administrators to deal with.i am not saying her choice was wrong.just that we approached the problem from different perspectives.

now gorilla decided to become the human torch and flame out.which threw my approach right out the window.

but the point i am making in that case,is that bad ideas,bad philosophies,bigotry and racism will ALWAYS reveal themselves if we allow that process to ultimately expose bad ideas/shit person.

the free flow of ideas is the proverbial rope that ultimately hangs all shit ideas.

thanks for hanging kids.
love you all!

Is self promoting considered in bad taste? I posted Rep. John Lewis speech to Congress, and I feel what he says is so important, it would be such a shame that it isn't noticed or viewed. What's the proper protocol doll? Thanks!

@harlequinn Nothing says we only do one thing.

And the rest of us have a problem with the "I don't want congrats" line not because of bigotry or misinformation. We people who are paying attention to this narcissist see it as appalling bad taste that Donald makes this tragedy so baldly about how great he is. So soon after the event.

It is astounding to me that this needs to be explained. It is almost as if false narratives are being created here. Almost as if deliberate misdirection is being attempted.

Or maybe it is true misunderstanding, and the difference between bigotry and narcissism is truly something that can't be distinguished.

Well, now you know, right?

My mistake.
I'll admit, his delivery is going down hill these days. I've been a fan for a LONG time, but he's not as good as he once was by far.
I get especially annoyed when he gets upset when his audience groans at a bad taste joke, it's like he doesn't understand that's a POSITIVE reaction to a bad taste joke, and indicates his audience understands it's in bad taste. You would think he would know that after 3+ decades in snarky 'comedy'.

To your points....
When a parent takes the kids side over the teachers....well, that depends on what the issue is, but on it's face that's also coddling. The implication/infrence is that it would be about the child's behavior in class, or their academic performance, and in either case taking the child's side over the teacher is teaching them that they are more important than the authority, and/or that their word is going to be taken over an adult in authority, and their POV or opinion is the only one that matters. That's terrible, and sets them up for failure and/or prison later.
Not telling a child to shut the fuck up when they are rudely interrupting adults DOES breed poorly mannered narcissists, as it's teaching the child that what they have to say is the MOST important thing, far more important than the adult discussion they are interrupting. That's terrible, bad manners, completely unrealistic, and not good for the child's development into a decent human being. Children are not adults, and 99.9% of the time what they want to say/ask is not important. Even in those rare cases where it is important, not teaching them to not interrupt creates mannerless narcissistic douchebags that never allow other people to speak and believe their every fleeting thought is golden.
Asking a kid where they want to go to dinner....OK, that's stupid. If you just ask them, the child isn't automatically in control. If you always ask them at every meal and defer to their whim over the wishes of adults (which is what I think he meant, but not what he said), that's coddling and breeding a narcissist that believes his is the only opinion that matters to anyone and should always take precedent over other's needs/wants.

so then what is your response to the hundreds of other "face-punch" games?
featuring justin beiber,to hillary clinton,to even jack thompson who was making similar arguments that sarkesian was making.

where was the outrage in those cases?
those people received threats as well.
how come in those cases were viewed as either satirical or just in bad taste,but in sarkesians case it had the possibility of translating to actual violence?

even though there is absolutely zero evidence to substantiate that claim?
couldn't every single one of those face-punch games be viewed as indulgent fantasy?

and if they ARE all viewed as such,how come there was nary a peep in regards to those games,yet the sarkesian one is supposed to be taken as an actual threat of physical violence?

do you not see the hypocrisy here?

this is playing victim to a victimless crime.
it is political theater dressed up as "oppression" using fear as the main driving force.

and it draws attention away from real,actual womens grievances,and THAT my friend,is the real crime.

From what I've read, they are attacked quite often. They are fairly bony and allegedly bad tasting, but Orca, sea lions, and the like do eat them. Smaller predators can't get through their thick skins. They subsist mostly on jellyfish, which might explain some of it. The predators wouldn't like to go into jellyfish swarms.

Sweet Bastard Zombie Jesus!

You don't think well, and are 100% wrong about both my education and acquaintances, but you, on the other hand, do not seem to have either education or personal acquaintances to draw from on this subject. It seems some militant Feminist (they are not the only brand of Feminist, BTW) left a bad taste in your mouth, so now all feminism, to you, is distasteful. That's like eating a single spoilt sausage and from then on loudly telling people at dinner "meat is all tainted and it all makes you sick...you're just too dumb to know it", and continuing on that vein until they either (from exasperation) either stop eating it in your presence or find a way to ignore you, IMO, because attempting to rationally explain that some improperly handled meat is tainted, but not all, falls on deaf ears.

Dictionaries are where you look up the definitions of words, which is exactly what I did. Because you can't grasp the concept doesn't make it wrong.

Because your mind can't grasp the difference between the name of a movement based loosely on an idea and that idea does not mean there isn't one. Sorry, fail, just like your second paragraph in your last post which included many ANTI-feminist theories along with some overboard militant Feminist theories...I wonder if you can follow that thought since you don't grasp the difference in the words and claim there isn't one.

Equality is not advancement of one group at the expense of the other, it's the discontinuation of that process.

MY dictionary?!? Me thinks you protest too much. What's your issue with the English language (or language in general) that use of one of the main tools of language causes you such consternation and spawns such disrespectful and angry sounding replies? I honestly think you're just angry that I proved your argument's major flaw (that flaw being your inability to distinguish between a loose group's name and an idea...which makes one wonder, do you believe there were roaming gangs of large, dark colored cats protesting and attacking police in the US in the 60's and 70's?), but can't bring yourself to admit your argument had any flaw.

"Cultural fiction of gender"?!? Oh...I didn't realize I was having a discussion with a completely crazy person. If you actually believe gender is a "cultural fiction", there's no point discussing anything with you, because you live in a different reality from the rest of us that actually HAVE a gender, and not just culturally derived gender, and have ancestors that had gender before there was such a thing as "culture". What an insane statement, one that totally missed the point as well.

Spit on me, you'll find yourself in a bad place, and you'll find that many in favor of Women's rights are also in favor of removing ALL involuntary cultural distinctions of gender, a thing that has NOT been done by far, and you wish to stop any advancement towards equality of genders while one side is SO far ahead based solely on their GENDER. (damn, that word again describing a thing that doesn't exist...you must hate that, huh?)

Yes, if you fail to even conceive that, unfairly, there is a gender split in society that 99% of the time favors one gender to the detriment of the other, you by default fall into that opposing force, opposing fairness and equality, and individualism. No question. It's sad to me that you can't see that.

I'll ignore your last 2 paragraphs, I'm not speaking for @bareboards2, she's perfectly capable of speaking for herself, but has intelligently decided that further discussion with you on this subject is pointless...and I see she's likely right, you just want to argue about it, as made clear by your never ending arguments spawning from a simple clarification of what 2 words (spelled the same, but one being a proper name, the other an idea) actually mean...according to THE dictionary, and your insistence that the dictionary is wrong because it doesn't support your position that feminism and Feminism are the same thing. BWAAAHAAHAAHAAHAA!! That's too funny. Thanks for the laugh.

Enjoy exploring that hypothesis further, but without my further input. My points are made, some repeatedly.

And here we present many of the common video clips seen on 4chan's /f/

And yea I think they shoulda left the toy story one out, the whole point of that clip was to be bad taste, not funny.

I'll disagree.
Non-racists don't make racist jokes. Period. They are disturbed by racist speech, they don't play around with it with friends for fun.
Perhaps you aren't overtly racist, perhaps you consciously make an effort to not discriminate against other races. You could still be racist.
There are many levels of racism.
I think what you describe is a form of what's called 'tacit racism', where (at least publicly) you don't say racist things, but aren't disturbed by others saying them, certainly not enough to say so.
Consider....when someone makes a bad taste, but funny, racist joke in public, do you glare at them, or smile at them, or both? If you find humor in degrading other races, even in private, that's a form/level of racism...IMO. (I think most people will fall into that category of being 'slightly racist', including myself to be perfectly honest, while trying to not let that make them discriminate against others or act on that racism)
Maybe I misunderstand you, but that's how it sounded to me.