OFFS: The Forsakening

User avatar
fyodor
Posts: 6832
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:18

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by fyodor » 13 Jun 2018, 14:47

Shem wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:20
Dangerman wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 13:57
One person giving money to a political campaign is not the same as putting a God Hates Fags sign in each franchise.
Dude, they gave money to people who pushed the "death penalty for gays" law in Uganda. As well as conversion camps here at home. This isn't political donations we're talking about.
Yeah, I think there's differences of degree of perceived repugnance and visibility that would factor in. Also, not sure how to boil this down to one word or phrase, but seems there's a difference between someone working the window and the primary owner of the company. Also a difference between making a choice for yourself and insisting on others making the same choice. No doubt a lot of gray area, as with most of life....
Your optimism just confuses and enrages me. - Timothy

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 22846
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Mo » 13 Jun 2018, 15:14

fyodor wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:47
Shem wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:20
Dangerman wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 13:57
One person giving money to a political campaign is not the same as putting a God Hates Fags sign in each franchise.
Dude, they gave money to people who pushed the "death penalty for gays" law in Uganda. As well as conversion camps here at home. This isn't political donations we're talking about.
Yeah, I think there's differences of degree of perceived repugnance and visibility that would factor in. Also, not sure how to boil this down to one word or phrase, but seems there's a difference between someone working the window and the primary owner of the company. Also a difference between making a choice for yourself and insisting on others making the same choice. No doubt a lot of gray area, as with most of life....
Also, there's a difference between, "A portion of our profits go to PP," vs. the CEO is a wealthy patron of PP.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Kwix
Posts: 1480
Joined: 17 May 2010, 22:07
Location: Great White North

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Kwix » 13 Jun 2018, 15:29

Warren wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 12:59
Dangerman wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 12:42
There is a 100 percent chance that you are buying products from people who have politics you don't like. That's ok.
Yes, you don't need to concern yourself with whether or not your dry cleaners are Nazis. But it's different if they put swastikas in their windows.
If they do you'll know they will get your whites truly white.
"pedialyte is like planned parenthood for hangovers. it costs you a bit, but it makes your little problem go away until the next time you drink too much."-- dhex
"Sweet tea is the archvillain in Wilford Brimley's origin story." -- Ellie

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12224
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Eric the .5b » 13 Jun 2018, 15:40

Shem wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:20
Dangerman wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 13:57
One person giving money to a political campaign is not the same as putting a God Hates Fags sign in each franchise.
Dude, they gave money to people who pushed the "death penalty for gays" law in Uganda. As well as conversion camps here at home. This isn't political donations we're talking about.
Yeah, that's why I joined in on the boycott while it was running, despite one being the closest and easiest place to get lunch at work.

I started going again after the boycott because eternally punishing a company for things they're no longer doing is counter-productive.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24250
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Warren » 13 Jun 2018, 15:49

nicole wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:26
Ellie wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 11:39
I'd go gay for those waffle fries. Or straight. Whatever. I'd suck something.
Team Ellie
I will sponsor that team.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
dhex
Posts: 15363
Joined: 05 May 2010, 16:05
Location: 'murica

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by dhex » 13 Jun 2018, 15:51

everyone's gotta follow their heart on this one. i'm ok with never eating there.
"I do wear my New Balance tennis shoes when I'm wearing cargo shorts, though, because truth in advertising." - lunch

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12224
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Eric the .5b » 13 Jun 2018, 15:52

JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 09:22
The thing about the mean world take is it presumes people invoking these things actually believe in the mean world. They don't. They just like being able to act like everything they dislike is actually in real life a threat so they can use social sanction, policy or even law to get their way.
If people acting like freaked-out idiots over things like guns, crime, etc. are all faking it, we are a nation of far too talented actors to have ever elected the likes of Reagan and Trump.

It has nothing to do with social justice. My late grandmother thinking the country was falling apart in chaos and crime because Fox News told her so? My "Back The Blue" meme-posting brother fearfully considering putting his kids in private school because of those school shootings that he thinks are happening all over, all the time? Mean World.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22451
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by JasonL » 13 Jun 2018, 15:58

I just noticed that the mean world comment was a response to a general school lockdown comment where I was having it as a response to a chick fil a specific incident. So .... nevermind?

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22451
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by JasonL » 13 Jun 2018, 16:04

I will revise to something like - Mean World is definitely a thing and in particular anything related to children and in particular for white middle class and above mommies. No identifiable risk is tolerable and danger is everywhere.

I think there are elements who do not believe notably higher risk things are present but tactically choose to act like that's the case - basically as a way of getting their way. This is the essence of the social justice stratagem.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24250
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Warren » 13 Jun 2018, 16:13

JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:04
I will revise to something like - Mean World is definitely a thing and in particular anything related to children and in particular for white middle class and above mommies. No identifiable risk is tolerable and danger is everywhere.

I think there are elements who do not believe notably higher risk things are present but tactically choose to act like that's the case - basically as a way of getting their way. This is the essence of the social justice stratagem.
I think that is true, but I also think that the success of that tactic has resulted in a social subset of people who genuinely believe it because it is accepted dogma within their sect.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
fyodor
Posts: 6832
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:18

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by fyodor » 13 Jun 2018, 16:20

JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:04
I will revise to something like - Mean World is definitely a thing and in particular anything related to children and in particular for white middle class and above mommies. No identifiable risk is tolerable and danger is everywhere.

I think there are elements who do not believe notably higher risk things are present but tactically choose to act like that's the case - basically as a way of getting their way. This is the essence of the social justice stratagem.
I wouldn't try to dispute that someone somewhere is best described that way. I'm very skeptical there's anything close to evidence that we can read enough minds to say that's the predominate thing with any large group of people. Again, that they can more likely get their way by acting like they believe something hardly demonstrates that they don't really believe the belief consistent with acting that way. It would certainly align more with my read on human nature (backed by many psychological studies) that people are much MORE likely to believe something that aligns with their behavior than not.

Now, if what you were saying is that it's the fact that a certain behavior can help them get their way that leads to a particular belief system that aligns with that behavior, as opposed to either vice versa or anything remotely resembling a fair ascertainment of the available facts, then I would at least concur that that might very well be the case (though I would likely still stop short of saying "Exactly!" in lieu of any hard evidence).

ETA: To be clear, it's the suggestion that people any numbers significant enough to care about consciously "do not believe notably higher risk things are present but tactically choose to act like that's the case" that I find unsupported and very unlikely. I'll add to that that if you're only talking about a small minority of powerful elites, it's a distinct possibility there, such as with college administrators, or politicians.
Last edited by fyodor on 13 Jun 2018, 16:25, edited 1 time in total.
Your optimism just confuses and enrages me. - Timothy

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22451
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by JasonL » 13 Jun 2018, 16:23

I note a distinct lack of worry about risk items unrelated to politics among the crowd in question. Mommies worry about everything for their precious children. Poisons, stranger danger, etc.

The white male supremacy is murdering me through culture crowd ... it's a pretty targeted sort of mean world, right? Like it is only mean when it's convenient for an argument?

User avatar
fyodor
Posts: 6832
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:18

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by fyodor » 13 Jun 2018, 16:30

JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:23
I note a distinct lack of worry about risk items unrelated to politics among the crowd in question. Mommies worry about everything for their precious children. Poisons, stranger danger, etc.

The white male supremacy is murdering me through culture crowd ... it's a pretty targeted sort of mean world, right? Like it is only mean when it's convenient for an argument?
I think you're greatly underestimating the both the human mind's ability to compartmentalize and the importance to humans of being on the correct side of arguments they find important. (I.e., "it's only mean when it's convenient for an argument" is not so much "only" but very key.) But short of trying to look up all the stuff I've read about this, I can hardly prove it to you.
Your optimism just confuses and enrages me. - Timothy

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12892
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Highway » 13 Jun 2018, 16:37

Kolohe wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:22
The Chik Fil A nearest me is scary efficient during the lunch and saturday family shopping rushes.
All of the CfA stores are scary efficient. The ones here have drive thru lines 20 cars deep. And people will still stay in those lines, where anywhere else they'd bail and go somewhere else, because they know that 20 cars at CfA is no big deal. Same thing with a full queue inside the restaurant. CfA can probably get through that 20 car line faster than the local McDonald's here can move 5 cars (the McDonald's here, especially the drive-thru, is horribly slow).
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22451
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by JasonL » 13 Jun 2018, 16:42

Straight talk fyodor - you are neutral between the ideas that people saying Brett Weinstein's response to their day of absence was a) actually increasing their risk of being killed (they said this) and b) were making a non issue into a life threatening issue so they could exercise power? Is there no amount of give me a break eyerolling that counts here?

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24250
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Warren » 13 Jun 2018, 16:58

JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:42
Straight talk fyodor - you are neutral between the ideas that people saying Brett Weinstein's response to their day of absence was a) actually increasing their risk of being killed (they said this) and b) were making a non issue into a life threatening issue so they could exercise power? Is there no amount of give me a break eyerolling that counts here?
Point of order: Are we agreed that the primary point of concern WRT the Day of Absence incident is not the words and deeds of the students, as obnoxious stupidity is highly correlated with youth, but in the response of the administration/faculty that served to legitimize the obnoxious stupidity?
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
fyodor
Posts: 6832
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:18

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by fyodor » 13 Jun 2018, 17:00

JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:42
Straight talk fyodor - you are neutral between the ideas that people saying Brett Weinstein's response to their day of absence was a) actually increasing their risk of being killed (they said this) and b) were making a non issue into a life threatening issue so they could exercise power? Is there no amount of give me a break eyerolling that counts here?
I would say no amount of absurdity that you or I see in a particular POV is enough to prove that holding that POV is insincere.

To reiterate, it may very well be that (b) leads to (a). I do hope that you at least see that they are hardly mutually exclusive? I ask that because you repeatedly seem to play the two off against each other.

Part of how people hold to absurd beliefs is being surrounded by others who do. It may very well be that were you to remove any of those students who said what you say they said (the one article I found on the subject so I'd know what you were talking said Weinstein was accused of being racist but didn't mention the specific charge you cited) from that environment and tried to talk sense to them, they might possibly relent and find some other rationale for being hostile to Weinstein. Even then, that they might ever admit (even to themselves) that this was all a cynical ploy to push someone around seems highly unlikely to me. YMMV.
Your optimism just confuses and enrages me. - Timothy

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22451
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by JasonL » 13 Jun 2018, 17:02

Warren wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:58
JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:42
Straight talk fyodor - you are neutral between the ideas that people saying Brett Weinstein's response to their day of absence was a) actually increasing their risk of being killed (they said this) and b) were making a non issue into a life threatening issue so they could exercise power? Is there no amount of give me a break eyerolling that counts here?
Point of order: Are we agreed that the primary point of concern WRT the Day of Absence incident is not the words and deeds of the students, as obnoxious stupidity is highly correlated with youth, but in the response of the administration/faculty that served to legitimize the obnoxious stupidity?
Yes. The students were still doing a thing and that thing was not actually being afraid of his email though.

User avatar
fyodor
Posts: 6832
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:18

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by fyodor » 13 Jun 2018, 17:03

Warren wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:58
JasonL wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 16:42
Straight talk fyodor - you are neutral between the ideas that people saying Brett Weinstein's response to their day of absence was a) actually increasing their risk of being killed (they said this) and b) were making a non issue into a life threatening issue so they could exercise power? Is there no amount of give me a break eyerolling that counts here?
Point of order: Are we agreed that the primary point of concern WRT the Day of Absence incident is not the words and deeds of the students, as obnoxious stupidity is highly correlated with youth, but in the response of the administration/faculty that served to legitimize the obnoxious stupidity?
Yeah, also in line with what I said previously, I would not be at all surprised if the administrator aligns with Jason's perspective, that is, that the administrator didn't believe a damn word of that crap but was merely trying to play mealy mouthed diplomat and please-don't-fire-me.
Your optimism just confuses and enrages me. - Timothy

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 7134
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Shem » 13 Jun 2018, 17:07

Eric the .5b wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 15:40
Shem wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 14:20
Dangerman wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 13:57
One person giving money to a political campaign is not the same as putting a God Hates Fags sign in each franchise.
Dude, they gave money to people who pushed the "death penalty for gays" law in Uganda. As well as conversion camps here at home. This isn't political donations we're talking about.
Yeah, that's why I joined in on the boycott while it was running, despite one being the closest and easiest place to get lunch at work.

I started going again after the boycott because eternally punishing a company for things they're no longer doing is counter-productive.
I still don't eat there because I don't like the charities they're giving money to now any more than I liked the old ones, but, the ones now aren't "brainwash teenagers into self-loathing and quietly get gay people overseas murdered" charities, so we're back into "reasonable people can disagree" territory.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 15896
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 13 Jun 2018, 17:10

Dangerman wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 12:42
ChikFilA wins on consistently being 5/5 as expected on their staples.

As far as Kultur War, I encourage everyone to not make themselves responsible for other people's actions. There is a 100 percent chance that you are buying products from people who have politics you don't like. That's ok.
Eh, for CFA and some others, they actually take their money and give it to organizations with not just bad politics but with some other bad behaviors. CFA's donations included some places pushing gay conversion therapy which seems to be actively harmful to people completely outside the political/government sphere.

Still, I worked out that a $20 donation to the HRC or Planned Parenthood or the like will offset the amount of your money that'd go to bad actors for a meal a week for something like five years. We donated $50 or $100 or so to Human Rights Campaign and I don't know how much to Planned Parenthood, so I think we're set for a long time.

CFA is in my Arby's/TacoBell/CFA triumvirate of places-to-go-when-you-don't-want-burgers-but-need-fast-food-for-whatever-reason.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24250
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Warren » 13 Jun 2018, 17:22

lunchstealer wrote:
13 Jun 2018, 17:10
CFA is in my Arby's/TacoBell/CFA triumvirate of places-to-go-when-you-don't-want-burgers-but-need-fast-food-for-whatever-reason.
TacoBell? No thank you. I'll take SubWay. Or better yet IHOP... oh wait.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22521
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Jennifer » 13 Jun 2018, 17:46

Taco Bell's spicy quesadilla sauce is genuinely delicious. However, I've not set foot in a Taco Bell ever since Jeff found a quesadilla-sauce knockoff recipe online. That sauce (actually a form of jalapeno mayonnaise) is now a standard condiment in our fridge.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 15896
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 13 Jun 2018, 17:49

mrs lunch won't do subway because of the whole sheltering an actual child molester thing

And taco bell is perfectly fine for brown stuff in flatbread cuisine, at least if you know what you're going for. One seven-layer burrito and one chicken soft taco is as not-awful as any big chain burger. And when I was broke in college you couldn't beat two bean burritos and a soft taco, which was a solid meal for like $2 at the time.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 11293
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Ellie » 13 Jun 2018, 18:20

Do you guys have Taco John's where you live? Taco John's is a billion times better than Taco Bell.
"NB stands for nota bene do not @ me" - nicole

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests