Lurker > Criminalt

Stick with it, @WrestlinFan . (Another former alcoholic talking here.)

Cheaper than reincarnation, I suppose.

Yep, still got it on my shelves, I think.

Weezy_Tha_Don posted...

wait are they not?

Well, you're not encouraged to just turn them inside out.

A night? I thought it was a week...

Would it even make a difference?

Just goes to prove a man can be half right and half wrong.

CelestialVoices posted...

stupid and dumb

It is stupid and it is dumb to be so prudish about 13 and 14 year old kids reading swear words or seeing a cartoon image of a naked woman. That's not in doubt. The question is, are they doing it because they're a bunch of silly prudes who've already banned a ton of other books from school for similar daft reasons (do they do this sort of thing a lot in Tennessee?), or are they doing because they're all Nazis engaged in a Holocaust denial conspiracy targeted at this one book?

That's the heart of the issue here. When in doubt, always go for the more dramatic explanation and don't bother digging deeper for the facts.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Someone who insists that there's only one reason, ever, to ban anything related to the Holocaust (use your finger to slowly trace that word, "anything"; let your lips move with the syllables) is already comparing banning Maus to not letting first graders see the most horrific parts of the Holocaust.

I'd just like to know if the absolutist clowns who insist there are no legitimate circumstances, ever, to censor or ban anything related to the Holocaust would be prepared to take back those words if some parents thought their children were too young to be exposed to its graphic horrors -- or if they'd just sling even more shit at the parents and straight out accuse them of being Nazis. I know where my bet's going.

ScazarMeltex posted...

Yeah dude is pretty clearly arguing in bad faith.

The school's assistant principal, Julie Goodin, champions Spiegleman's book during the school board meeting and says it's "a great way to depict a horrific time in history".

You: "That means she's a Nazi sympathizer who's trying to sanitize and silence discussion about the Holocaust. You're defending a Nazi. You must be a Nazi."

No one who claims that this is a Nazi conspiracy to stifle Holocaust education can answer the simple but important question: Do schools in McMinn County have any other books about the Holocaust in the library, or use them in class? In other words, has the school not actually banned all books about the Holocaust -- only Spiegelman's book, and not specifically because it's about the Holocaust? Should we at least bother to find out?

You: "No. I don't need to know all the facts. Facts aren't the truth, my opinions are the truth. The only people who think it's important to know more facts before they make a judgement are Nazis. You must be a Nazi."

Spare me the self-righteous posturing. You don't even have a fucking argument. That's why you carefully sidestepped those points: because a boring insistence on mundane facts takes all the fun out of indiscriminate shit-slinging, finger-pointing, and name-calling.

Please, don't ever sit on a jury. The justice system's in a bad enough state as it is. Lynch mobs and kangaroo courts seem to be more your thing, anyway.

Nasty_Nitro posted...

Maus is a childrens book specifically designed to approach the difficult topic of the holocaust for very young readers.

Again, the statement: "There is only one reason to ever try to censor anything related to the holocaust or the nazis." Clearly, "anything" is a pretty broad term that doesn't limit itself to just Maus. OK?

There are parents who'd have perfectly legitimate reasons why they wouldn't want their child exposed to horrific images from the Holocaust at a young age. That wouldn't justify stigmatizing them as crypto-Nazis out to "censor" Holocaust education. It is possible to want certain materials not to be used in a classroom, for reasons that are not connected to some Nazi conspiracy.

And again, the question: do schools in McMinn County use or stock any other books to do with the Holocaust? Unless we have that missing piece of information, we're not yet in a position to judge exactly what's really going on here -- but apparently that doesn't prevent people from making lazy assumptions and crass generalizations.

Nasty_Nitro posted...

look how far you had to stretch your hypothetical

When someone says "there's only one reason, ever", why anyone would want to try censoring anything to do with the Holocaust, that's tendentious nonsense. I offered a perfectly legitimate reason why a parent might want to.

Nasty_Nitro posted...

duke transformed into Johnny Cochran to defend his party

Over my head. Translation, please?

Alucard188 posted...

Should offer up some edits to remove the objectionable material and call their bluff.

Again: if you read what the report says about the school board minutes, it seems that was indeed the school's first idea -- but apparently some board members cited worries about copyright if text or images were redacted, which I suppose may not be entirely implausible (or at least genuinely held).

ScazarMeltex posted...

There is only one reason to ever try to censor anything related to the holocaust or the nazis.

Meaning that the onlypossible reason for parents to object to a school showing graphic documentary footage from the liberation of Belsen or Dachau in their child's first grade class would be because the parents are neo-Nazis, rather than worried about their child having nightmares?

Again, the question: does this school have any other works relating to the Holocaust in its library? Be advised that "I don't know, but obviously the board's in a neo-Nazi conspiracy to silence all Holocaust education" isn't really an answer.

Not happy with that phrase, "give money to the poor". Poor people have pride and most of them don't like to be treated as if they're beggars.

Better to say: "never give a man nothing to lose". A man with nothing to lose is a dangerous man, and anyone with at least half a brain would know that. It's not so much about giving them money; it's more about giving people a stake and a safety net. If poverty is such a dire state to sink into that it's something be avoided at all costs, then you won't care what you do, or who you hurt, to avoid it.

ScazarMeltex posted...

To quote Neil Gaiman "there is only one type of person who would vote to ban Maus, whatever they are calling themselves these days".

Has this school board removed or banned other books from the library because they ran counter to school policy about profanity or depictions of nudity? If they haven't, then they're training a suspicious focus on this particular case. But if they have, then that's just called consistency, in which case: tough shit.

Does this school have any other titles in its library that touch upon, or deal with, the Holocaust? Has anyone even thought to ask that simple question, before framing this issue as a deliberate attempt to silence all teaching about it?

Never known a career criminal who didn't want to be rich, rather than just not poor. So, maybe we should ask them to name their own figure, see how much it takes to make them happy, hand it over, and assume problem solved?

Mind you, I'm not sure how exactly you can "redact" certain text and pictures from a graphic novel in a library; put stickers over them, maybe?

Reading the report, the minutes indicate that the Director and the school's attorney proposed redacting "eight curse words" and a "picture of a woman" rather than removing the book outright; but other board members were worried about running into legal problems with copyright. The assistant principal insisted during the meeting that Spiegelman's book was "a great way to depict a horrific time in history". So I'm not seeing the pro-Nazi conspiracy you're all somehow seeing.

Putin's too shrewd to declare outright war. It'll be fought covertly, low intensity, in cyberspace as hackers try to sabotage every critical system they can. You can do a lot of damage that way for a relatively tiny outlay of resources and it'll be less easy to trace directly: plausible deniability. When nuclear warfare is suicidal and conventional warfare risks escalating to that level, you resort to electronic warfare instead.

Blightzkrieg posted...

I consider myself a big fan of Fantasy style dwarves, and I don't really think there's a good way to avoid the connection between fictional dwarves and real dwarfs, aside from a complete language change for one or the other (which has already kind of been tried with little success).

Yeah, I can't really see how to square that circle either.

HornedLion posted...

You mean like how Jesus did? Versus not allowing poor folks into your church to seek refuge during a hurricane because youre afraid theyll dirty the carpets.

Indeedy.

I've a certain amount of respect for preachers (even if preachers can be incredibly annoying) who are willing to get out of their comfort zone and move their asses into dangerous areas to do what they see as their job.

MetalGarurumon posted...

but he has no problem taking those roles himself though

You might have noticed that Hollywood isn't exactly awash with roles for actors with dwarfism, except for fantasy characters. You take the jobs you're offered.

ThyCorndog posted...

why is he so stupid? anyone know?

Because he doesn't want to lose touch with a fanbase that doesn't so much set the bar low as practically drop it on the ground.

Accidentally rest my coffee cup on it.

Full Throttle posted...

Do you think Disney is making the right decision by axing the dwarves?

Disney in "dwarf snuff movie" shocker.

Just goes to show how important it is for your health to stay active after you retire.

You can't have my cake and you can't eat it.

Fight for a real cause, pussies.

Nope. Pretty sure that if I had done, I'd have infected my wife -- which would have killed her or put her seriously ill in hospital, because she has a number of autoimmune disorders that stack the chips against her. Christ knows what the longer-term picture's going to be like.

I've heard he could will himself to shrink down to half his normal size. He was a space saver.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Pretty much the same. I swear my cat used to put a "D'you think I'm some sort of brain-damaged imbecile, you hairless two-legged moron?" expression on her face if I tried baby talk on her.

Stubborn refusal to believe that the law of gravity applies to them as well as to lesser mortals.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

That says more about you then about video meetings.

Nearly two years of working from home because of the pandemic, and minimizing outside contacts (to avoid the risk of infecting wifey because she's clinically extremely vulnerable). I've been so institutionalized, it's a wonder I didn't start smearing my own excrement all over the walls while chewing on the bones of my neighbours' pets.

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

No.

I grew up through the Cold War and this ain't no thang for me.

Yep. We lived through a time when chronic tension was ratcheted up so high, it seemed like a sneeze could set off the nukes. I think our chances are better now than they were then.

Worst video meetings are the ones where you thought you'd switched your camera off because they're supposed to be audio only, but when you join the meeting everyone gets a close-up of your unshaven face and unwashed hair and you look bad enough to terrify small children. Or even grown adults.

mooreandrew58 posted...

South Park did one as well where it was the government started to conspiracy theories so people would think they where more powerful than they where. Iirc

That sounds hilarious...! "Honest, we're not incompetent bunglers, we're all-powerful and all-knowing!"

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Is there a conspiracy theory about why there are so many conspiracy theories?

I think The X-Files touched upon this. There was a plot strand that put forward the theory that basically, the belief in a government conspiracy to cover up the truth about alien abductions had in fact been manufactured by the government, in an attempt to cover up the fact that it was carrying out the abductions itself. In other words, a strategy of diverting the spotlight away from the mundane truth by focusing it on a fantastical lie instead.

Yep, worked with a guy who once or twice dropped acid on his way to work -- call him a user rather than an addict, really, although apparently his habit was quite a bit heavier outside of work. It was a tad unsettling on one occasion when he lost some focus while handling drums of toxic chemicals.

Eric Crapton.

Slayerblade11 posted...

A lot of people overeat to cope with negative emotions. Probably a link between PTSD and overeating

I doubt that 78% of all US military vets have served in a combat role where they were exposed to high-stress situations ... unless you count the institution itself as pretty stressful to work for.

Because you need the exercise.

Obligatory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk

It's about as evil as cutting your toenails, but obviously a lot more fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhmKfpKM8bw