[Non-US] News That Makes You laugh/cry/neither...

[hyzmarca]

Because those people are so obviously crazy and wrong we don't have to argue against them to persuade everyone else they're wrong.

If I've learned anything from 1984 (and also the Nazis) is that nothing unites people like hate. Groups of people can overcome any difference so long as they're united in hate against some other group. And the more obvious it is that you should hate someone, the easier it is to enflame and foster that brilliant, beautiful, unifying hate.

[Chamomile]

@DSMatticus: I don't bother messing around with my sig like at all, but that latest post actually made me laugh out loud a little. Congratulations.

@hyzmarca: Why do you love clickbait slanderers so much? How come every time someone recommends a course of action regarding limiting their ability to ruin careers and reputations, you immediately try to derail the conversation? Are you on a payroll or do you actually thing that these Republican caricatures of feminism made real by the dark magic of a forsaken god are a thing worth sabotaging people's casual activism over?

[hyzmarca]

@hyzmarca: Why do you love clickbait slanderers so much? How come every time someone recommends a course of action regarding limiting their ability to ruin careers and reputations, you immediately try to derail the conversation? Are you on a payroll or do you actually thing that these Republican caricatures of feminism made real by the dark magic of a forsaken god are a thing worth sabotaging people's casual activism over?

No, its just that I give zero fucks about what they say.

When it comes to arguing about pointless things that don't actually matter my plate is full with tabletop RPGs and sci-fi shows both on the internet and in real life.

At best its like the activist version of Seinfeld, activism about nothing.
At worst its like the activist version of Seinfeld, activism about nothing.

I just recognize that people do have the right to argue about nothing on the internet. Because if we took that away there would be nothing left but porn and shopping sites and porn.

[Dean]

If you're going to wimp out of a movement because some extremists appropriate the label, then do yourself a favor and stay out of social movements. Forever.

See, this shit is not really anything new. Hell, it's the go-to tactic of the reactionary backlash. Do you really think that you're forging some fucking new ground with your jejune and facile observation that some feminists are making the movement look bad? For fuck's sake, this is the exact same playbook the reactionaries ran in the 70s with scuttling the ERA.

Suck my actual dick. Don't educate me about how you're a real man who does activism right. I marched this month, I've passed out petitions this week. I engage in actual, in the real world, activity for these belief systems so don't tell me how you're a good feminist and I'm a bad one from your fucking armchair.

There actually is a time to get out of the Black Panthers, and it's after they turn from a brave group of black rights activists to a government infiltrated extremist group. It's your kind of reactionary moral bigotry that made me have to drop the group identity even while maintaining the action. It's tribal for you, being "feminist" is good regardless of what that belief structure means now and being "not feminist" means you're a rape apologist and need to be drowned out.

You're painting this as if it's a tiny group acting outside the norm but that just makes me think you're uninvolved. Unaware that the clickbait feminism trend couldn't possibly exist without massive popular support. Try actually coming to some events, include yourself in these social circles. These belief systems are the norm now, they are not an exception and you plugging your ears and pretending it will go away if you ignore it is ignorant of the group you are lecturing me on. Go to just one event, there's got to be a college somewhere near you, and actually talk to people. Ask some questions about sex-negative beliefs, paternalism, personal freedoms, take your pick. Ask as many people as you can. At the end of that you tell me if it was just a tiny minority that has hundreds of terrible ideas wrapped onto their one good one. I can pursue a society with sexual equality without those ideas and I can do it without your label.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Don't educate me about how you're a real man who does activism right. I marched this month, I've passed out petitions this week. I engage in actual, in the real world, activity for these belief systems so don't tell me how you're a good feminist and I'm a bad one from your fucking armchair.

Here's a suggestion for you: next time, pat yourself on the back before sticking your thumb up your ass. I don't give a fucking fuck how many babies you fed or how many petitions you promulgated. For this particular issue you're fucking wrong. Mother Teresa doesn't get to hide behind her incorrect views on AIDs because she nursed orphans. Don't shit on your hard work by using it as a shield from criticism.

You're painting this as if it's a tiny group acting outside the norm but that just makes me think you're uninvolved. Unaware that the clickbait feminism trend couldn't possibly exist without massive popular support. Try actually coming to some events, include yourself in these social circles. These belief systems are the norm now, they are not an exception and you plugging your ears and pretending it will go away if you ignore it is ignorant of the group you are lecturing me on.

Look, stupid, when clickbait feminists actually get the ear of a major corporation, more than a handful of Congressmen, major legislation considered, or a PAC that can throw it's weight around then I'll be convinced that it's more than making a mountain out of a molehill.

I openly mock your self-efficacy. I spit on your boots-to-the-ground and your actual activism and your crybaby fears. Whine about armchair liberalism all you want, I'll keep spitting. Don't like it? Then either shut the fuck up or show me some fucking proof that's not anecdata. Then I'll take your concerns seriously.

[DSMatticus]

Instead of argueing with the feminists who are obsessed with equal media representation and telling them that they're wrong, why don't we all gang up against the ecofeminists, who are not only wrong but actually genocidal.

http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2014/10/ ... look-like/

What are you smoking? Absolutely none of the controversies that have ever touched the Den boil down to the question of whether or not women are underrepresented in the media (they are) and whether or not that needs addressed (it does). This particular controversy, of course, centers around how because the people leading the charge are third-rate clickbait "journalists" even when they are in the right they cannot help themselves from overreaching by condemning male sexuality as objectifying. Their position is very specifically not noble; it is confused and harmful.

There actually is a time to get out of the Black Panthers, and it's after they turn from a brave group of black rights activists to a government infiltrated extremist group.

The Black Panthers were an organization with leadership. Feminism is, at best, a system of ideals. That isn't to say you won't find communities centered around those ideals, but it is to say that no community owns those ideals anymore than any other. Clickbait pop-feminism isn't feminism anymore than WAP was feminism or Camille Paglia is feminism. But that is to say that WAP, Paglia, and the blogosphere can be harmful to the label simply by being terrible and in the public eye.

Look, stupid, when clickbait feminists actually get the ear of a major corporation, more than a handful of Congressmen, major legislation considered, or a PAC that can throw it's weight around then I'll be convinced that it's more than making a mountain out of a molehill.

Look, I am not and never will be on Dean's side of the label debate, but if there is anything to learn from GamerGate it is that this particular tribe has such an overwhelmingly monopoly on certain spheres of media that they can pull off successful media blackouts on issues that make them uncomfortable. There may have been a time when you could dismiss the significance of these idiots, but that time is passed. What you're actually looking at is a slightly more moderate but considerably more popular WAP 2.0, and they are winning the ears of mainstream news outlets and major corporations.

Edit: Yes, I know GamerGate is a contentious issue and every day the group is a little more misogynist than the day before (and it was a pretty disturbing coalition to begin with). But that youtube video did not DMCA itself, TotalBiscuit really did have his own angry twitter lynch mob after him, and Reddit really did massdelete all the comments in the reddit thread about TB's twitlonger post at Zoe Quinn's request. Censorship has been at the core of this from the moment it blew up, but in the media it's nothing more than a footnote if it's mentioned at all. You obviously don't have to (and absolutely should not) agree with everything that comes out of the mouths of GGers, but the blackout and spin is not the least bit imagined or exaggerated.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Look, I am not and never will be on Dean's side of the label debate, but if there is anything to learn from GamerGate it is that this particular tribe has such an overwhelmingly monopoly on certain spheres of media that they can pull off successful media blackouts on issues that make them uncomfortable. There may have been a time when you could dismiss the significance of these idiots, but that time is passed. What you're actually looking at is a slightly more moderate but considerably more popular WAP 2.0, and they are winning the ears of mainstream news outlets and major corporations.

You're right; I completely overlooked this and I was wrong. That is troubling when you put it like that.

[Stahlseele]

did you have to mention gamer gate again?
is that still going? I was so happy to not have heard or read any mentioning of it for a week or so by now <.<

[Lago PARANOIA]

On reviewing some of my previous posts, I realize that I was being an overly belligerent shithead. I mean, more than I usually. So... I apologize, Dean.

[Koumei]

So the G20 was hilarious for image macros and satire news sites.

It started with Obama arriving to see a bunch of Russian warships parked right outside Australian waters. It was just a regular training exercise. That happened to be scheduled the day after Tony made his "shirtfronting" threat.

"Go on, stop THESE boats, Tony. Tow these motherfuckers to Indonesia, I dare you."

So that was funny. There was also the matter of shirts which must be worn at all times. Note: Satire

Then in his opening speech for world leaders, Tony boasted about turning back our efforts on tackling climate change (and asked others not to talk about that, more on that later!), and whined that he couldn't get us to accept his deregulation of university fees and GP co-payment. Basically, Obama was facepalming, thinking "Oh for fuck's sake, he's turning Australia into the exact thing I'm trying to change America from." Seriously, he used that moment of their attention to whine about us not accepting his dumb ideas. So the Shovel gives us this.

I said I'd get back to climate change. The US and China made an announcement about their engagementdeal to take even further action to address climate change. Note that I don't give a fuck about the future of humanity or the planet as a whole, but chocolate, tea and coffee are seriously things that might stop existing (except as ultra-expensive luxury items for the upper classes) in my lifetime. So these guys took the moment to celebrate making an effort, and investing money into renewable energy (a rapidly growing industry in parts of the world not called Ausfailia, able to create loads of jobs and generate money). And eating less of our coal. So just assume they wiped their dicks on his face. They probably did.

Putin called Tony a good host, which in light of the threats sounds basically like saying "Yeah I called his bluff and he's a massive baby who is too scared to actually confront me face-to-face. I think I might name him Ukraine."

[PhoneLobster]

I said I'd get back to climate change.

Just as icing on top of the embarrassment cake for Tony No Friends (his new official title as duly elected leader of Australia No Friends)...

... the ONE big thing he held out on in the G20 statements and our own national commitments (or complete lack of them) was his putting shit all over the international Green Climate Fund and refusing to back it.

It was just us and Japan and Canada. Then Japan, Australia and The USA sat down in a "trilateral talk" that resulted in Japan contributing 1.5 billion and Australia running away in tears (metaphorically).

So it was just us and Canada. Lovely "Tar Sands" Canada, also known as "Only other nation in the entire world that agreed to publicly call themselves a member of the Tony No Friends International alliance against the international alliance against climate change"

Just us two nations together.

...
Then Canada signed on for support of the Green Climate Fund as well.

...Australia No Friends... Tony No Friends... Poor Poor lonely Tony...

edit: And also, yes, again, even fucking David Cameron managed to make himself look really good in direct comparison to Lonely Tony No Friends at an international meeting AGAIN. Yes. THAT David Cameron. Yes. AGAIN.

[Koumei]

It's always funny when even David "I'm such a [EDITED] that Scotland nearly broke up with us" Cameron tries to ignore Tony and looks sensible compared to him. "Just... don't make eye contact, okay guys? Anj? Bazza? Just look away, and the comedian will surely stop, then they'll send their real prime minister."

[Dean]

On reviewing some of my previous posts, I realize that I was being an overly belligerent shithead. I mean, more than I usually. So... I apologize, Dean.

I don't think you were being overly belligerent. I didn't respond to your post but I did consider your point. The fact is I don't know if my position is correct on this issue. Your assertion is correct that I've allowed my concept of feminism to be changed by experiences that are largely anecdotal. It is reasonable to say that I am judging feminism almost entirely through the prism of white liberal Massachusetts college girls but, like all humans, I am only my experiences and from those I've had I've made the best judgement I can. This isn't an argument I can gather statistics for it's much more ephemeral than that. This is an argument where it is extremely possible that my position is the wrong one and given that that is true I appreciate attacks being made on it that are as strong and belligerent as possible.

[Username17]

Dean, this might not surprise you, but you are in fact wrong. And to illustrate why you're wrong, I'm going to tell you the story of Women Against Pornography. They were a "radical feminist" organization in the 70s that was still a big deal in the 80s and only formally stopped existing in the late 90s. Their idea was that women were exploited and marginalized by prostitution and pornography, and that the response to that should be to crack down (or crack down harder in those places where there already were crack downs) on pornography and prostitution.

Now, you probably know why this is a stupid and terrible idea. Women are not exploited and marginalized by pornography and prostitution. Pornography and prostitution are abstract concepts which can't oppress anyone. Women are exploited and marginalized by people, and society as whole encourages this by not standing up for the women. And obviously, women who are in careers which are currently being "cracked down on" by society as a whole are demonstrably more vulnerable to that sort of thing.

So Women Against Pornography organized some big marches and got the ears of some politicians and mounted some quite credible assaults on freedom of expression generally and sexually active women in particular. It was actually enormously harmful. But you'll notice: they don't exist any more. And they don't exist because the Feminist Sex Wars happened, and they lost. That's where other Feminists with a clearer utilitarian thought process noticed that Women Against Pornography were calling for greater marginalization of women. Angry arguments were had, and the good gals won. And there was much rejoicing.

But that isn't even the only time this has happened. The Temperance Movement has a bad reputation for good reason, but that came out of feminism as well. Social conservatism is wrong, and it's harmful, but people are going to suggest it in response to social problems every single generation because social conservatism promises easy answers to complicated problems. And if there are any weeds that grow better in barren soil than laziness and ignorance, I don't know what they are (and don't care enough to find out).

The solution is not to give up your principles or to allow social conservatives to take your social movements, it's to stand up and say that they are wrong and why they are wrong and to do it from the standpoint of feminism and humanism. And to do it over and over again for years until the latest group of reactionaries loses steam. And then do it again when the next reactionary idea pops up like a whack-a-mole. And it's exhausting, and it doesn't end, because it's civilization and civilization doesn't fucking end.

Right now, in Eastern Europe we have Femen. And Femen does some really great stuff. They do disruptive protests of Eastern Orothodox churches and rallies against mistreatment of women, and it needs to happen. But they also have pretty much exactly the position on pornography and prostitution that Women Against Pornography did, and it's still wrong. And the solution is not to condemn Femen altogether, but to engage with them on the fronts they are wrong and support them on the fronts they are right. It's complicated. Because life is complicated.

-Username17

[Shatner]

Great post, Frank. Despite the gravitas of the statement you're making, the part I felt compelled to highlight is this:

And if there are any weeds that grow better in barren soil than laziness and ignorance, I don't know what they are (and don't care enough to find out).

And that is a goddamned hilarious sentence which I will be appropriating for future use.

[Omegonthesane]

Great post, Frank. Despite the gravitas of the statement you're making, the part I felt compelled to highlight is this:

And if there are any weeds that grow better in barren soil than laziness and ignorance, I don't know what they are (and don't care enough to find out).

And that is a goddamned hilarious sentence which I will be appropriating for future use.

Aye. Sigged.

[Longes]

Czech president pelted with eggs on revolution anniversary
TL;DR: Milos Zeman and Joachim Gauck were giving a public speech in Prague. Wild demonstrators appeared and threw eggs at Zeman. Zeman's security acted quickly, and the only one hit with an egg was Gauck.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

This is a non US thing, and the idea popped in my head about the Women Against Pornography thing.

I have heard that if you're a woman on welfare or unemployment (or whatever the German word for that is, no doubt something with fifteen syllables), they can tell you to get a job at a legal brothel, and if you refuse they can take away their unemployment because she's refusing a job that is offered.

Can anyone more knowledgeable about Germany confirm/deny this?

[Longes]

Dutch government refuses to reveal ‘secret deal’ into MH17 crash probe

Part of the agreement between the four countries and the Dutch Public Prosecution Service, ensures that all these parties have the right to secrecy. This means that if any of the countries involved believe that some of the evidence may be damaging to them, they have the right to keep this secret.

I don't think we'll ever learn the truth about MH17

[Stahlseele]

This is a non US thing, and the idea popped in my head about the Women Against Pornography thing.

I have heard that if you're a woman on welfare or unemployment (or whatever the German word for that is, no doubt something with fifteen syllables), they can tell you to get a job at a legal brothel, and if you refuse they can take away their unemployment because she's refusing a job that is offered.

Can anyone more knowledgeable about Germany confirm/deny this?

A Technicality, but if you are forced to do it under threat of losing something you need to live, then it's not volountary anymore, and involountary prostitution is still illegal in germany, even if the state is the pimp in question.
Basically, you are allowed to become a prostitute if you want to, but nobody is allowed to make you do it under any circumstances. As an aside, if you do go that route, you are likely to make much more than you'd get on unemployment probably i guess . .
If we use 100 bucks as a flat fee, then at once per day you are looking at 2800+ per month, which is above average pay . .
Even if you leave out weekends for only 5 work days a week, you are still looking at 2000 bucks a month.
Minimum Wage that's coming for germany on january 1st of 2015 is something like 8,5 bucks or so per work hour. And at 40 hours a week, this then becomes 1360 bucks per month. and that is before you pay taxes . .

[Longes]

This is a non US thing, and the idea popped in my head about the Women Against Pornography thing.

I have heard that if you're a woman on welfare or unemployment (or whatever the German word for that is, no doubt something with fifteen syllables), they can tell you to get a job at a legal brothel, and if you refuse they can take away their unemployment because she's refusing a job that is offered.

Can anyone more knowledgeable about Germany confirm/deny this?

A Technicality, but if you are forced to do it under threat of losing something you need to live, then it's not volountary anymore, and involountary prostitution is still illegal in germany, even if the state is the pimp in question.
Basically, you are allowed to become a prostitute if you want to, but nobody is allowed to make you do it under any circumstances. As an aside, if you do go that route, you are likely to make much more than you'd get on unemployment probably i guess . .
If we use 100 bucks as a flat fee, then at once per day you are looking at 2800+ per month, which is above average pay . .
Even if you leave out weekends for only 5 work days a week, you are still looking at 2000 bucks a month.
Minimum Wage that's coming for germany on january 1st of 2015 is something like 8,5 bucks or so per work hour. And at 40 hours a week, this then becomes 1360 bucks per month. and that is before you pay taxes . .

That's a complicated question though. I mean, if prostitution is legal, then it should be treated like any other job. If you are refusing the job presented to you, then you are unemployed out of your free will and shouldn't get any benefits for being unemployed. With legal prostitution, there shouldn't be a difference between "Go be a floor sweeper in the school or we'll take away your unemployment benefits" and "Go be a prostitute or we'll take away your unemployment benefits". A job is a job.

[Kaelik]

If you are refusing the job presented to you, then you are unemployed out of your free will and shouldn't get any benefits for being unemployed.

I disagree.

With legal prostitution, there shouldn't be a difference between "Go be a floor sweeper in the school or we'll take away your unemployment benefits" and "Go be a prostitute or we'll take away your unemployment benefits". A job is a job.

Arguably that might be considered sexism, and in the US you could dispute it on equal protection grounds, because in practice male prostitutes are such a drastically different job, you could probably argue whatever the German version of equal protection is.

[Stahlseele]

We could also tell Vegans or Vegetarians or moslems or Jews to go and take a Job as a Butcher, even if it goes against their Religion/Beliefs. Technically we could do that. Technically we could do all kinds of things that are technically within the law. It is usually not done because it's an asshole thing to do and even if you have to work with asshole bureaus and other such shitheads in general administration, they either are not asshole enough to do it or they rightfully fear getting the boot when such things are made public.

[hyzmarca]

This is a non US thing, and the idea popped in my head about the Women Against Pornography thing.

I have heard that if you're a woman on welfare or unemployment (or whatever the German word for that is, no doubt something with fifteen syllables), they can tell you to get a job at a legal brothel, and if you refuse they can take away their unemployment because she's refusing a job that is offered.

Can anyone more knowledgeable about Germany confirm/deny this?

A Technicality, but if you are forced to do it under threat of losing something you need to live, then it's not volountary anymore, and involountary prostitution is still illegal in germany, even if the state is the pimp in question.
Basically, you are allowed to become a prostitute if you want to, but nobody is allowed to make you do it under any circumstances. As an aside, if you do go that route, you are likely to make much more than you'd get on unemployment probably i guess . .
If we use 100 bucks as a flat fee, then at once per day you are looking at 2800+ per month, which is above average pay . .
Even if you leave out weekends for only 5 work days a week, you are still looking at 2000 bucks a month.
Minimum Wage that's coming for germany on january 1st of 2015 is something like 8,5 bucks or so per work hour. And at 40 hours a week, this then becomes 1360 bucks per month. and that is before you pay taxes . .

Your forgetting to take into account expenses and overhead, which can be fairly high depending on the brothel. If your hypothetical prostitute worked at the Pascha, for example, she'd actually be losing 80 Euros a day because of fees and taxes, and that's before you take into account the cost of equipment.

Also, the whole thing with unemplyment offices forcing women to become prostitutes is bullshit.

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

Its old bullshit, too.

[Kaelik]

We could also tell Vegans or Vegetarians or moslems or Jews to go and take a Job as a Butcher, even if it goes against their Religion/Beliefs. Technically we could do that. Technically we could do all kinds of things that are technically within the law. It is usually not done because it's an asshole thing to do and even if you have to work with asshole bureaus and other such shitheads in general administration, they either are not asshole enough to do it or they rightfully fear getting the boot when such things are made public.

That is also illegal in the US. But I understand that Germany has significantly less religious protections than the states... Though then again, that is probably true of anyone, I bet in Iran corporations aren't allowed to assert religious aversion to pigs as a reason to avoid paying taxes