Sexism is still more socially acceptable, because it spans all minorities. Yeah, having a black president is a big deal, but we'll know when the US has truly evolved as a society when we have our first woman president.

But I'm sure @quantumushroom was just trying (and failing) to be funny.>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^quantumushroom:
WOMEN AREN'T FUNNY. GET BACK IN THE KITCHEN.

Racism gets you banned, but blatant sexism is okay?

Well said. You couldn't possibly be the bmacs I'm playing words with friends with right now, could you? >> ^bmacs27:

The ultimate issue is "is it a choice?" Homosexuality is not considered a "choice" and thus is not considered "fair game" for criticism. Similarly a lot of data is showing that metabolic set points are not a "choice" or at least they're determined at a young age. Granted, you could starve yourself and exercise into losing weight, but the success rates long term are very low. People who try generally get depressed because they are forcing their body to operate in a way it doesn't want to simply to conform to social norms. The parallels with homosexuality continue. I mean, gay people could act straight. They just don't want to. Further, there is little data to suggest health issues associated with weight once you control for other lifestyle choices (exercise, diet, smoking, etc). Many people exercise everyday, eat a healthy diet, lead healthy lives, and are just fat. Honestly, it's the last bastion of socially accepted prejudice.

you;re just wrong. nobody Needs to be obese (rare genetic diseases aside)
you're wrong to tell people they need to be obese
and your wrong to insinuate that healthy eating / exercise makes people depressed
eating well and being active make people feel good. know what makes people depressed? obesity, its a deadly sin, by which i mean you will be dead, decades early, if u decide being healthy is just not a choice you can make.

>> ^bmacs27:

The ultimate issue is "is it a choice?" ... Many people exercise everyday, eat a healthy diet, lead healthy lives, and are just fat. Honestly, it's the last bastion of socially accepted prejudice.

The ultimate issue is "is it a choice?" Homosexuality is not considered a "choice" and thus is not considered "fair game" for criticism. Similarly a lot of data is showing that metabolic set points are not a "choice" or at least they're determined at a young age. Granted, you could starve yourself and exercise into losing weight, but the success rates long term are very low. People who try generally get depressed because they are forcing their body to operate in a way it doesn't want to simply to conform to social norms. The parallels with homosexuality continue. I mean, gay people could act straight. They just don't want to. Further, there is little data to suggest health issues associated with weight once you control for other lifestyle choices (exercise, diet, smoking, etc). Many people exercise everyday, eat a healthy diet, lead healthy lives, and are just fat. Honestly, it's the last bastion of socially accepted prejudice.

>> ^Fletch:

>> ^SDGundamX:
You've been registered since 2007, so surely you must know that there exists a segment of Sifters who are hardened Islamophobes (though they hate being called that).
"Islamophobe" is a word the reality-challenged use so they can more easily compartmentalize and parse a confusing world. I am no more islamophobe than I am a cilantrophobe, Romneyphobe, or panflutophobe.
I've been registered since 2006, but that has nothing to do with recognizing there are some hardened ignoramuses here (although I'm sure you don't like to be called that). There will be Islamic "extremists" and "fundamentalists" (or, as @gorillaman correctly stated, Muslims) as long as the Koran exists, because they are simply following what it tells them to do. Moderate or peaceful Muslims are not (at least, on the whole). They ignore much of the cornerstone of their religion, choosing to cherry-pick from it those tenets that suit them and the kind of life they wish to lead, just as all the various Christian "sects and factions" selectively follow the Bible.
Now, I'm all for muslims who choose to live peaceful, tolerant, and inclusive lives. If you're going to believe in magic and ancient fairy tales, I'd much rather your delusions lead you to First World, socially acceptable life choices. But portraying them as true Muslims is just ignorant, and denies what Islam is. Islamic "fundamentalists" are far, far from a fringe group.


Just for the record, I wasn't implying you specifically were an Islamophobe. Certainly there are lots of Sifters who have submitted anti-<insert pretty much any religion name here> vids to the Sift because they know they'll get a little traction and probably get Sifted. Congrats on getting Sifted, by the way.

Also for the record, Islamophobe is a word used to describe an irrational fear of Muslims that usually leads to discrimination in some form, whether that be people calling for the prevention of the building of a proposed mosque or spying on the entire population of Muslims without cause across multiple states and trying to pass it off as "anti-terrorism tactics" (i.e. the NYPD).

So the view that Islamophobia is "reality-challenged" seems itself to be "reality-challenged" as the above real-world examples indicate.

P.S. Calling someone who disagrees with you an ignoramus says tons more about you and your argumentation skills than it does about your opponent.

>> ^SDGundamX:

You've been registered since 2007, so surely you must know that there exists a segment of Sifters who are hardened Islamophobes (though they hate being called that).

"Islamophobe" is a word the reality-challenged use so they can more easily compartmentalize and parse a confusing world. I am no more islamophobe than I am a cilantrophobe, Romneyphobe, or panflutophobe.

I've been registered since 2006, but that has nothing to do with recognizing there are some hardened ignoramuses here (although I'm sure you don't like to be called that). There will be Islamic "extremists" and "fundamentalists" (or, as @gorillaman correctly stated, Muslims) as long as the Koran exists, because they are simply following what it tells them to do. Moderate or peaceful Muslims are not (at least, on the whole). They ignore much of the cornerstone of their religion, choosing to cherry-pick from it those tenets that suit them and the kind of life they wish to lead, just as all the various Christian "sects and factions" selectively follow the Bible.

Now, I'm all for muslims who choose to live peaceful, tolerant, and inclusive lives. If you're going to believe in magic and ancient fairy tales, I'd much rather your delusions lead you to First World, socially acceptable life choices. But portraying them as true Muslims is just ignorant, and denies what Islam is. Islamic "fundamentalists" are far, far from a fringe group.

If it were socially acceptable to rub one out to a movie trailer, this would be the one for me. This looks so f-ing good.

>> ^A10anis:

God had nothing to do with it. It wasn't a prayer answered, nor was it a miracle from god. It was the result of an unselfish donation, which allowed highly skilled doctors to perform the true "miracle" of science.


Whatever helps her through her grief perhaps? Atheists can also be humanists unconcerned with the reverence and respect for faith and the divine that others have, whatever their grasp or intelligence.

The question would be, "Can you be a socially-acceptable and respectful atheist and keep from saying something similar in insectoid, atheist form which would belittle the woman's faith in God during her grief, or would you simply rant at the first mention of some higher power, like most obnoxious atheist motherfuckers do??

I'm pro-gay marriage, but this is just a guy refusing to accept money for a service due to personal beliefs/opinions. Gay marraige is non-traditional, and will remain 'atypical' in many people's eyes for a couple more decades. Personally, I can't be mad at people who think of themselves as traditional/conservative when they act in the way they self-define.

If a creepy 55 year old guy and a quiet little 17 year-old came into my hypothetical bakery, would I refuse to make a cake for their wedding? Maybe ... maybe thats my limit to what is socially acceptable... and I think it would be my prerogative to refuse serving them.


(p.s. I up-arrowed a good number of Shiny's comments to offset down-arrows... in my mind 'downvoting' on this site is reserved for innapropriate comments, like personal attacks.)

This isn't about jokes at all. It's about any kind of communication. It just happens that most of the questionable communication that involves rape in our society happens to be stand-up comics because controversy and uncomfortable topics are their bread and butter. It could be a joke, a manifesto, a painting or an idle comment on a Sift video. Point is, it's not about jokes at all, never mind whether the joke is funny.

Anything that promotes rape is unacceptable socially. Things that involve rape in any other way are socially acceptable. It's up to people who witness the delivery to decide if it promotes rape or not.

I don't think this should be controversial. It's like racism. I doubt anybody here would say that all jokes about blacks are fine, because overwhelmingly they promote racism.

Bottom line, telling jokes about rape doesn't promote rape necessarily, but sometimes it does.
[slight editing for clarity]

>> ^shinyblurry:

I'm not defending the mormon church, I am just commenting that the level of discourse in society is at an all time low, that this is socially acceptable. Obviously it isn't a winning issue with videosift, but I think that its wrong to treat people this way.
>> ^UsesProzac


I'm not sure that the level of discourse has changed, so much as Christianity has become an acceptable target again. Parker and Stone actually treat the Mormon church with an unprecedented level of respect considering all the things that South Park has parodied, as evidenced by the "All About Mormons" episode. They present the religion as weird, but in the end, the people of South Park are shown to be a million times stranger and the Mormons decide the best course of action is to leave all the idiots to themselves.

BORING!!!>> ^shinyblurry:

As much as I disagree with mormonism, it's easy to see what this really is, which is an attack on faith, especially faith in Jesus Christ. They just found a way to caricature it in mormonism. It's really quite a sad thing to watch those people revel in the mockery. Our society has degenerated to such a point where it is socially acceptable to openly ridicule millions of people. While I am concerned for the souls of the mormons, I think this attack on their faith is really quite despicable.

They tried that in communist Russia and it didn't work out very well

>> ^dag:

Is nothing sacred?!!
That's the point.
>> ^shinyblurry:
I'm not defending the mormon church, I am just commenting that the level of discourse in society is at an all time low, that this is socially acceptable. Obviously it isn't a winning issue with videosift, but I think that its wrong to treat people this way.
>> ^UsesProzac

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Is nothing sacred?!!

That's the point.
>> ^shinyblurry:

I'm not defending the mormon church, I am just commenting that the level of discourse in society is at an all time low, that this is socially acceptable. Obviously it isn't a winning issue with videosift, but I think that its wrong to treat people this way.
>> ^UsesProzac

It's trolling to have an opinion?

>> ^UsesProzac:

>> ^shinyblurry:
I'm not defending the mormon church, I am just commenting that the level of discourse in society is at an all time low, that something like this is socially acceptable.
>> ^UsesProzac

Your troll is showing, friend.