Religion The Fucking Left

[DaGaffer]

I honestly dont get

Honestly don't get the whole Nirvana album thing. His parents were paid for the picture and agreed to it being taken. After that, it's the photographer's property, right? Looks like it's just a money grab to me. Why now, he even admits he has reposed for the picture several times in the past.

His argument is that the parents never gave consent for its use which is bizarre as they accepted payment. No legal knowledge of photography and image use it just seems odd to me and makes no sense given the case.

Of course its a money grab, especially the pedo thing, which is pure shakedown designed for a quick "go away before we get the word pedo attached to our IP" payout.

 

[Embattle]

@Scouse

Another one you may be interested in:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8LxraECD5E

 

[Wij]

View: https://twitter.com/Nicllan/status/1431983248377253888

 

[Scouse]

View: https://twitter.com/Nicllan/status/1431983248377253888

A man was escorted away (kindly) by police for his own safety because he decided to argue with a big group of angry people.

I mean, good on him, but that's what protests are like, no?

If he'd been arrested then that would be a different matter. It's clearly a risk because of our fucking idiotic laws (sponsored by the fucking left). But all that video showed was people non-violently disagreeing and the po-po removing a potential flash point.

Personally, I'd have left him to argue and waited until the fists began to fly and then moved him / them on - that gives a chance for a heated debate to take place and hopefully not turn to actual physicality. It can happen. But if the cops see actual violence then they have to make arrests so...


Edit: And btw - who knows what that guy was - whether he was gay, straight, a troller? We've only got that commentary to go on, nothing in the vid shows what it's actually about and what was said. Meh. Outraged people.

There's a really good tweet about a greenland shark that's 150 years older than the United States in that thread tho

 

[Raven]

Context dear boy, he was attacked for wearing a lgb hat and accused of being a transphobe or some shit by a baying mob of mental people.

They get really pissy if you say you wouldn't stick your nob in a trans person.

 

[Scouse]

Context dear boy, he was attacked for wearing a lgb hat and accused of being a transphobe or some shit by a baying mob of mental people.

I didn't see any of that in the video - so how do you know that's not just some regurgitated bullshit narrative?

 

[Raven]

Because people that were there have said that is the case, and the trans fascists, who are 100% enabled, have extreme form.

 

[Scouse]

Because people that were there have said that is the case, and the trans fascists, who are 100% enabled, have extreme form.

Yeah. I want to see actual evidence that that is actually what happened, sorry.

Twitter arguments and rumour don't count. Twitter is a fucking shitshow of horrendous extremism by design. None of the people "saying" that's what happened on twitter are impartial actors. It's mob-by-design.

 

[DaGaffer]

You've got a bunch of people who've weaponised the word "transphobe" and then unilaterally decided what the rules are for what a transphobe is, which is anyone who disagrees with the people who came up with the word. 90% of the idiots in that crowd probably don't even know why they were having a go at that guy; they were just following the mob.

 

[Scouse]

You've got a bunch of people who've weaponised the word "transphobe" and then unilaterally decided what the rules are for what a transphobe is, which is anyone who disagrees with the people who came up with the word. 90% of the idiots in that crowd probably don't even know why they were having a go at that guy; they were just following the mob.

Agree.

 

[Gwadien]

Swooping birds will be removed from parks after baby girl's death

Five-month-old Mia suffered fatal head injuries when her mother tripped and fell on her while trying to escape from a swooping magpie in a Brisbane park earlier this month.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Er, wut?

 

[Scouse]

Swooping birds will be removed from parks after baby girl's death

Five-month-old Mia suffered fatal head injuries when her mother tripped and fell on her while trying to escape from a swooping magpie in a Brisbane park earlier this month.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Er, wut?

If anything that's the fucking right. Bloody aussies.

 

[DaGaffer]

Swooping birds will be removed from parks after baby girl's death

Five-month-old Mia suffered fatal head injuries when her mother tripped and fell on her while trying to escape from a swooping magpie in a Brisbane park earlier this month.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Er, wut?

Its a horrible story, but the birds didn't kill the baby, the panicking mother who fell on her did.

 

[Gwadien]

Its a horrible story, but the birds didn't kill the baby, the panicking mother who fell on her did.

When I originally read it I thought the birds attacked the baby after the mum ran away, but nah, it's fucked up.

Imagine if we brought that to the UK, bye seagulls.

 

[gunner440]

When I originally read it I thought the birds attacked the baby after the mum ran away, but nah, it's fucked up.

Imagine if we brought that to the UK, bye seagulls.

With that logic, you might as well ban alcohol as well.

 

[Scouse]

Its a horrible story, but the birds didn't kill the baby, the panicking mother who fell on her did.

So the solution here is to ensure humans grow up closer to nature so they aren't terrified of stuff that couldn't possibly harm them.

Edit: Again, I cannot see any relevance to the thread. Are you so pissed off about the contents @Gwadien that you're trying to derail it Toht-style with completely irrelevant stories?

 

[Ormorof]

In previous work a lady has a similar sweeping bird (seagull) attack happen on way to work, she did not think it was funny that it happened outside the Rovio headquarters (of Angry Birds fame)

Solution was to leave the damn birds alone and walk along the pedestrian path instead of along the shore where the birds were nesting

 

[Scouse]

In previous work a lady has a similar sweeping bird (seagull) attack happen on way to work, she did not think it was funny that it happened outside the Rovio headquarters (of Angry Birds fame)

Solution was to leave the damn birds alone and walk along the pedestrian path instead of along the shore where the birds were nesting

I've had two seagull "attacks" happen this year. One on a mate whilst we were in Cornwall - swooped down across four of us when we were leaning against a jetty eating ice cream. It cleanly severed his cone and was away across the estuary before we even realised.

Second one was in Conwy a couple of weeks ago. Came from over my shoulder and had my full ice cream, leaving me just the bit of paper that the woman wrapped the ice cream cone in.

I wasn't even angry. I was just impressed.

The "solution" is to realise it's all our own fault and there's nothing to worry about. Perhaps we should learn to applaud them for their audacity, and sympathise that they're probably going to get seagull diabetes

 

[MYstIC G]

So the solution here is to ensure humans grow up closer to nature so they aren't terrified of stuff that couldn't possibly harm them.

Edit: Again, I cannot see any relevance to the thread. Are you so pissed off about the contents @Gwadien that you're trying to derail it Toht-style with completely irrelevant stories?

Because all fears are rational...

 

[Scouse]

Because all fears are rational...

Of course not - but that's the point of ensuring we're more exposed to nature. Because people who grow up around birds don't blindly panic and run because something benign flies close to them, needlessly dropping and killing their own child.

 

[Hawkwind]

There are all the health benefits of being closer to nature as well. Gut biome and improved immune responses are proven. Add that to the mental benefits and we really should be pushing to be closer to nature and the countryside.

 

[Raven]

Here you go @Scouse

Tripwire boss steps down over support for Texas abortion law

Tripwire boss John Gibson had said he was "proud" of the Supreme Court ruling on Texas abortion.

www.bbc.co.uk

Disagree entirely with him, wouldn't force him out of his job though.

 

[Embattle]

The problem with that is when you read it he seems to of made a statement about his personal belief as if it was a company wide one, thus partner companies that felt very different about it started to cut ties.

 

[Scouse]

The problem with that is when you read it he seems to of made a statement about his personal belief as if it was a company wide one, thus partner companies that felt very different about it started to cut ties.

The thing is though @Embattle - how many people who've publicly tweeted their disgust with the supreme court ruling have lost their jobs?

"While your politics are your own, the moment you make them a matter of public discourse you entangle all of those working for and with you," Shipwright Studios said.

Shipwright Studios indeed haev a point (which is why I think it's pure idiocy being on social media at all) - but how many organisations have cancelled contracts because people have tweeted stuff that agree with the court ruling?

The fact of the matter is, the very vocal left (who are welcome to their opinions) have created an atmosphere that deems what is "acceptable" political opinion and companies, who's priority is the bottom line, are running scared of being in that thought-crime firing-line (because it could affect their bottom line).

Therefore average joe has unbeliveably harsh consequences for publicly stating a simple viewpoint that they're perfectly legally able to hold (and is clearly widely held).

Because of this we're in a position where thought crime is very real. If you're not following the accepted narrative, which is largely controlled by the left, you're not really allowed to participate in free public discourse.

Ultimately, this is because companies and corporations don't value freedom of debate over reputational damage. Perhaps there needs to be laws enacted to protect the right of private citizens to hold public debate, to exercise their right to freedom of speech, without fear of losing their jobs - removing companies ability to remove people from their posts simply because of the opinions they hold.

It's not simple. And, frankly, I think the guy is really badly mistaken. But I could tweet support for abortion and not lose my job. I couldn't tweet support for a supreme court ruling* and not expect that consequence, however - because my company would be scared of reputational damage - because of the left.



*I can't tweet when I'm taking a holiday tbh. It's expressly forbidden as there's potential use-cases which put our systems at risk, believe it or not. But then, I could see all of this shit happening - the vocal left grabbing the narrative and using it to force an "acceptable culture" on us all the minute social media became a thing, so I've stayed well clear of all of those platforms.

Praise be lord @Deebs for for having the forsight in specifically setting up FH in a way that's about as "privately public" as can legally be

 

[Scouse]

Maybe we'll be allowed to be openly islamophobic again?

Afghan women to be banned from playing sport, Taliban say

National cricket team included in prohibition, as interim government containing no women starts work

www.theguardian.com

As in, freely allowed to "offend" people again because we can ridicule them for their bullshit religious beliefs?

No mistake - Islam is exactly like this when it's allowed to be - just as much as christianity wants control over women's bodies.

 

[DaGaffer]

The thing is though @Embattle - how many people who've publicly tweeted their disgust with the supreme court ruling have lost their jobs?


Shipwright Studios indeed haev a point (which is why I think it's pure idiocy being on social media at all) - but how many organisations have cancelled contracts because people have tweeted stuff that agree with the court ruling?

The fact of the matter is, the very vocal left (who are welcome to their opinions) have created an atmosphere that deems what is "acceptable" political opinion and companies, who's priority is the bottom line, are running scared of being in that thought-crime firing-line (because it could affect their bottom line).

Therefore average joe has unbeliveably harsh consequences for publicly stating a simple viewpoint that they're perfectly legally able to hold (and is clearly widely held).

Because of this we're in a position where thought crime is very real. If you're not following the accepted narrative, which is largely controlled by the left, you're not really allowed to participate in free public discourse.

Ultimately, this is because companies and corporations don't value freedom of debate over reputational damage. Perhaps there needs to be laws enacted to protect the right of private citizens to hold public debate, to exercise their right to freedom of speech, without fear of losing their jobs - removing companies ability to remove people from their posts simply because of the opinions they hold.

It's not simple. And, frankly, I think the guy is really badly mistaken. But I could tweet support for abortion and not lose my job. I couldn't tweet support for a supreme court ruling* and not expect that consequence, however - because my company would be scared of reputational damage - because of the left.



*I can't tweet when I'm taking a holiday tbh. It's expressly forbidden as there's potential use-cases which put our systems at risk, believe it or not. But then, I could see all of this shit happening - the vocal left grabbing the narrative and using it to force an "acceptable culture" on us all the minute social media became a thing, so I've stayed well clear of all of those platforms.

Praise be lord @Deebs for for having the forsight in specifically setting up FH in a way that's about as "privately public" as can legally be

Or, y'know, understand how corporations work in the US and realise separating your personal opinions from those of the company you represent, is effectively impossible. This isn't a left/right thing as much as it is a transparency thing, and in the specific case of the Texas abortion law, the rest of the country is really pissed off with them as much as for the "grass on your neighbours for fun and profit" policy as the law itself, which could potentially have far reaching consequences for all Americans.

Ultimately this comes down to the concept that the only way you'll get Republicans not to be total dicks is if you hurt them economically; frankly we could do with a lot more of that kind of thing.

 

[Raven]

Maybe we'll be allowed to be openly islamophobic again?

Afghan women to be banned from playing sport, Taliban say

National cricket team included in prohibition, as interim government containing no women starts work

www.theguardian.com

As in, freely allowed to "offend" people again because we can ridicule them for their bullshit religious beliefs?

No mistake - Islam is exactly like this when it's allowed to be - just as much as christianity wants control over women's bodies.

The thing is, they are a primitive society, even without the extreme version that the Taliban bring, the vast majority of Muslim countries are throw backs and shouldn't be dealt with until they grow up.

 

[Gwadien]

The thing is, they are a primitive society, even without the extreme version that the Taliban bring, the vast majority of Muslim countries are throw backs and shouldn't be dealt with until they grow up.

Absolutely.

But the reality is that we'll trade to benefit us but fuck the humanitarian aspect of things - ie the shit that might actually help them progress rather than proving the Taliban right that it does work.

 

[Scouse]

Ultimately this comes down to the concept that the only way you'll get Republicans not to be total dicks is if you hurt them economically; frankly we could do with a lot more of that kind of thing.

Don't particularly disagree with you on the content but that's no sort of way to build a world IMO. And there's nobody there to punish the dems or the left when they're being dicks.

So joe bloggs (assumption he's a republican, not just a christian democrat) has lost his job for saying he agrees with a court decision - frankly that's a really shitty thing.

 

[DaGaffer]

Don't particularly disagree with you on the content but that's no sort of way to build a world IMO. And there's nobody there to punish the dems or the left when they're being dicks.

So joe bloggs (assumption he's a republican, not just a christian democrat) has lost his job for saying he agrees with a court decision - frankly that's a really shitty thing.

The Dems are punished by a Supreme Court stuffed with Republican judges; i wouldn't be getting too worried about their freedoms.

As for "punished for saying he agrees with a court decision"; come off it, the content of said court decision is what's at issue here. This is a deeply unpleasant, regressive decision, enacted at the behest of religious fundamentalists, so fuck 'em, frankly. I'm not going to shed tears for them