- Viewing Profile: Reputation: Bone
BoneMember Since 26 Jan 2010
Offline Last Active Oct 23 2017 07:51 PM
- Group Retired Member
- Active Posts 3,638
- Profile Views 23,157
- Member Title no
- Age Age Unknown
- Birthday March 17
Posted by Bone on 25 February 2017 - 05:56 PM
Posted by Bone on 20 February 2017 - 08:10 PM
I don't. That's just asking for an infection and/or soap tasting bristles lol. I sterilize my toothbrush using boiled water pretty frequently. And I don't use toothbrush caps anymore because plastic caps are usually porous which are lovely bacteria breeding grounds. I store it in a drawer. I feel pretty strongly about the cleanliness of my toothbrush, in case that wasn't obvious, lmao.
Alright, I'm ashamed of this one.
Posted by Bone on 20 February 2017 - 07:46 PM
People seem to be misconstruing what happened. The "joke" wasn't him saying "Kill all jews". The joke was the fact that there exists online the publicly sanctioned ability (through Fiverr) to pay a man dressed up as Jesus or random caricatures of people in a "jungle" to say hateful and shocking things for petty cash. If Felix came on camera and said "Kill all jews" with no context, yeah, that'd be stupid as hell and a direct anti-semetic message. But he didn't do this. He highlighted the ridiculousness of the "Lifestyle" section of Fiverr by showing how easy it is to make people do shocking things for small amounts of money. It was a social commentary. Blame Fiverr for giving these people the platform. Or blame these people for doing shocking things for petty cash.
If your shock humor requires a joke about genocide to be shocking, it's not funny in the first place. There are plenty of other ways he could have produced social commentary on that topic without trivializing the experiences of Jews who have been killed or threatened by people using the same language.
It's no coincidence that minorities are often both laughingstocks and caricatures in public discourse and targets of violence.
The holocaust was horrible therefore people shouldn't ever joke about it?
Not with a joke that parrots neo-Nazi slogans as tastelessly as Pewdiepie's.
Posted by Bone on 20 February 2017 - 04:10 PM
in my opinion he (we) should be allowed to say whatever we want political / racist or otherwise and if people dont like it, the problem lies with them as a person, i don't hate on people's religious views or opinions, and sometimes im contriversial and politically uncorrect, but thats who i am, and i dont care what other views of me are.
Hitler/nazi views: its in the past, cant change that (yes it was wrong) but guys Hitler was a "victim' of suicide... xD
So you're saying that being a victim of racism means there's something wrong with you, but being a racist doesn't. Got it.
So....we should treat him differently because he has a big platform?
It's his channel and he should be allowed to post whatever he wants on it. If you're going to call him out on the shit he posts (in bad taste or not) you should be consistent with your outrage.
At the end of the day, Youtube allows us to view videos we want and not view those we don't want to view. If you don't like his content, don't view it. It's that simple.
He should be able to post whatever he wants (as long as it's not a threat or hate speech), but not without consequence. I treat all antisemitism the same way - by repudiating it. I never said he should be treated differently, just that his actions and language are amplified by his platform.
"If you don't like his content, don't view it" - ignoring prejudice and bigotry doesn't make it go away. Even if I'm not personally affected by the video, or antisemitism in general, I still don't want antisemitism to have a place in public discourse. Bigotry can start out as jokes, or videos, or whatever, but it doesn't take long for it to become violence if people don't take a stand against it and make it clear that it will not be tolerated. See: Dylan Roof, ISIS, Alexandre Bissonette.
Posted by Bone on 19 February 2017 - 04:40 PM
I was typing up a longer response to this but I got tired, so here's my $.02:
The opinion that people should joke about whatever they want is a privileged one. Jokes are never made in a vacuum, and it's the responsibility of the person making a joke to consider who its target it is and what effects it may have. While Pewdiepie probably isn’t a Nazi, joking about the Holocaust normalizes antisemitism and trivializes the unfathomable trauma people are still living through. Period.
No one is saying that he can’t make those kinds of jokes, but instead that it’s irresponsible, and content creators who are using a massive platform in a way that may cause harm to marginalized communities should not be financially supported or given a free pass.
Essentially - with power comes responsibility. I'm choosing to side with the victims of antisemitism in this case, not the person who's trivialized it.
Posted by Bone on 07 February 2017 - 04:46 AM
So, simply because of age, some people can't make decisions on their own?
It's kind of alarming that you need LGBT people to explain why pedophilia is wrong.
Posted by Bone on 06 February 2017 - 04:57 AM
He single-handedly sparked a huge spike in political advocacy and awareness in the younger generations and proved that the current presidential system is an archaic one that needs remodeling to adapt to the nation's modern needs. He is a good president for those reasons. What happens past the six month point would just be an irredeemable mess that no one can put a positive spin to lol
I don't think that point needed to be made by the election of a fascist. You're giving him way too much credit and minimizing the hard work of political organizers (and the groundwork laid during the Obama years – thanks social justice movement!) by saying he's a good president for causing the recent protests and resistance.
But I guess this is the unpopular opinions thread!
Posted by Bone on 23 January 2017 - 02:39 PM
I was there. Per the Women's March website, the march's mission:
The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear.
In the spirit of democracy and honoring the champions of human rights, dignity, and justice who have come before us, we join in diversity to show our presence in numbers too great to ignore. The Women’s March on Washington will send a bold message to our new government on their first day in office, and to the world that women's rights are human rights. We stand together, recognizing that defending the most marginalized among us is defending all of us.
We support the advocacy and resistance movements that reflect our multiple and intersecting identities. We call on all defenders of human rights to join us. This march is the first step towards unifying our communities, grounded in new relationships, to create change from the grassroots level up. We will not rest until women have parity and equity at all levels of leadership in society. We work peacefully while recognizing there is no true peace without justice and equity for all
The core/original goal of the march was a repudiation of the new president and his administration's broadly anti-women rhetoric and policies, but also captured pro-environment/science, anti-fascist, and pro-democracy sentiment. It also served to kick off a 100-day campaign of political action against the administration.
Personally, I saw the march as the beginning of a much-needed effort to resist the new administration's harmful and regressive goals and values.
P.S. - it was fucking awesome.
Posted by Bone on 24 July 2016 - 04:13 PM
All guns (more or less) should be banned and confiscated.
Posted by Bone on 24 July 2016 - 04:12 PM
I'm kinda proud of myself that I had to think about who Kimye was. I thought it was like... some kind of new music artist. The reality is that I barely even have time to keep up with the real news much less drama like I used to -_-
wow you're so cool for not knowing what something was, i'm proud of you too
Posted by Bone on 22 July 2016 - 03:19 AM
Posted by Bone on 16 July 2016 - 11:26 AM
Yes, definitely more impressed by zoos who are involved in conservation, but I still firmly believe an animal shouldn't be plucked out of its natural environment and thrown into a much smaller, artificial version of it.
I actually used to help out at the Smithsonian National Zoo - this was before I hit the age where I started questioning the ethics of just about everything ever - since a family friend was the director of the invertebrate exhibit. That exhibit has since closed down so the zoo could afford to buy a panda. And where did those invertebrates go? Right over into another zoo. There's almost no way to introduce an animal back into its natural environment. I could maybe be alright with animals as small as most of those invertebrates with much smaller environments (that can actually be recreated) being kept on display for the sake of teaching, but it's usually the large mammals kids beg their parents to go to the zoo for anyway.
Well, the invertebrate exhibit (which was fucking awesome) wasn't exactly shut down "so the zoo could afford to buy a panda;" it was shut down because the zoo's budget was slashed by Congress/budget sequestration, it was one of the least popular exhibits, and easiest to transfer animals to Front Royal and other zoos/conservation institutes.
The idea behind conservation-based zoos is that many of the animals exhibited/held in captivity would be extinct or gravely endangered if it were not for the efforts of conservationists and zoological parks. See: the black-footed ferret, golden lion tamarin, Kihansi spray toad, kakapo, Arabian oryx, Przewalski's horse.
There are definitely ethical questions, especially for some large mammals, but at the end of the day an animal not being in its "natural environment" is preferable to extinction when the "natural environment" has been modified by humans or completely destroyed. Even for animals that aren't endangered in the wild, zoos often provide opportunities for more in-depth study that can help for future conservation efforts. To just condemn zoos because you don't like to see animals in cages obscures the big picture.
As a side note on large mammals, while they often do receive seemingly undue attention by zoos and other conservation efforts, there have actually been a lot of positive side-effects to this. Because they often require large continuous ranges, tiger/panda/etc conservation programs have also preserved habitat for tons of other animals. And the "big-ticket" animals are the best at raising funds for conserving lesser-known but ecologically- and genetically- more important animals. While it would be dubious to claim a tiger in a zoo is living its best possible life, it's sure as hell better than being killed by encroaching humans or starving to death due to habitat destruction.
ANYWAYS HOORAY FOR BIODIVERSITY
Posted by Bone on 14 June 2016 - 06:45 PM
Posted by Bone on 12 June 2016 - 12:13 PM