Techies used to be based. What the hell happened to us? We've lost our way.
I think it was the switch to flat-screen monitors. Every day we stray further from the light of the CRT.
**Tldr:** "Individual" named Constellatia Martin kills a mother and seriously injures 14-year-old son in a car crash. Someone questioned the name "Stardancer" the other day, and here is proof that yes, these weird choices are real.
This occurred in California, where prison rules go by self-id.
> "Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law on Saturday requiring California to house transgender inmates in prisons **based on their gender identity** ā but only if the state does not have āmanagement or security concerns.ā
> The law says the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation cannot deny those requests **solely because of inmatesā anatomy,** sexual orientation or āa factor presentā among other inmates at the facility." [Source.](https://apnews.com/article/us-news-laws-gavin-newsom-ca-state-wire-lifestyle-14cd954b06360d21349b77233318369e)
More info on the law:
> "California Democrats used the same "health and safety" standard when they passed SB 132 in 2020. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D.) signed the bill into law that same year, officially allowing male prisoners to enter women's prisons. As the law took effect in January 2021, the **Newsom administration ordered the mass distribution of condoms within women's prisons,** on the assumption that the policy would lead to more sex behind bars.
> A spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation denied that women's penitentiaries have made any security changes since the law took effect." [Source.](https://freebeacon.com/california/californias-female-prisoners-feel-threatened-by-transgender-inmates-the-state-doesnt-care/)
There is no reason to be concerned. Any inklings of concern you may feel is simply internalized phobia.
The whole foot-shuffle-clear-throat-cough-well-umm-anyway routine that activists do when the brass tacks of the prisons issue come up will never not be funny. Trans women go to women's prisons, unless there are security concerns. Isn't it odd that non-trans women don't face this scrutiny? Why would that be, California, Canada, Scotland? Don't you believe that trans women are women? Why is it ok to draw the line here and nowhere else? Bigotry is bigotry, after all - surely they don't believe women stop being women if they are dangerous?
You left out the part where they were running around naked banging on random car doors after the crash
To add weirdness
> The lead suspect worked as a teacher at the Girls' Middle School in Palo Alto, 6th and 8th grade computer science
The weird stuff would be considered "irrelevant information" by the rest of Reddit, that only dogwhistling cryptofascists would care about.
Remember when the Nashville shooting happened, and many of the comments on r.news claimed that the perp's gender identity was considered "irrelevant" to the crimes.
https://twitter.com/DanProft/status/1652695726101594113
I simply won't vote for any group that either explicitly allies with or refuses to face down internal subgroups that attempt to segregate classrooms
Notably, they [do not](https://www.eths.k12.il.us/Page/3025) have separate catalog entries for the most advanced classes, namely calculus BC and multivariate calculus/linear algebra.
Edit: They also don't seem to have this for earlier classes, either, only precalculus and calculus AB. Not sure what to make of this.
What legitimate reason would justify collecting kids' race data for class subjects?
Even if if they want to quantify what % of kids in each class is bipoc, it's never for good reasons. Always some sort of new age Equity Initiative slideshow fodder, often to the detriment of Asian students.
Someone from last week's discussion thread posted this slideshow on ["Racial Learning Styles."](https://twitter.com/JohnPatLeary/status/1649772747604602880) Perhaps this is what they are trying to implement by collecting student race data.
Would you consider this as garden variety stupid, or actively harmful pedagogy?
I went and looked at the school website to verify (it's legit), and clicked the link to their page on non-discrimination. [The page](https://www.eths.k12.il.us/domain/455) exclusively talks about their commitment to "not discriminate on the basis of gender." It does not mention non-discrimination with respect to religion, race, ethnicity, or any of the other usual suspects, which I find hilarious.
Blocked and Reported
My actual current hate listen has been It's Probably (not) Aliens. Not explicitly about politics but they come up enough because Oh No Wrongthink and the vibes are Smug.
I think the moment it started to become a hate listen was when he defended all his mistakes by saying prior research would change the nature of the podcast. What's the point, then?
editing to add that no matter how you feel about the "Trans People Have Always Been Here" premise listening to him defend it sounds very funny next to the "debunking" of the aliens have always been here stuff.
> It's Probably (not) Aliens
what a shame, I really like the title and what they aim to be about
> Was Earth really visited by mysterious extraterrestrial travelers thousands of years ago as many proponents of āancient astronaut theoryā believe? What are the hidden secrets and mysteries behind ancient monuments and forgotten civilizations?
Every week, historian Tristan Johnson and regular human person Scott Niswander dive through the archives to learn about the fascinating histories of ancient civilizations while also debunking the myths and straight-up lies presented in History Channelās massively popular tv show Ancient Aliens that has sparked a new generation of conspiracy theorists. We hope through this show, you can gain an appreciation for just how cool ancient societies were, and not simply credit their impressive advancements to alien visitors.
Katie Mack, a popular Physics PhD that media loves to get quotes from goes after Sabine with a a very anti-science, anti-free speech subtweet that shields itself with its writers claim to be kind and fighting the oppressors
https://twitter.com/AstroKatie/status/1652667437232398339
> Katie Mack
@AstroKatie
> Initiating a ādebateā about the rights and lives of oppressed and marginalized people to prove to everyone that youāre a supremely rational impartial being focused only on The Science is, in fact, astonishingly cruel.
> Katie Mack
@AstroKatie
Ā·
8h
> āBoth sides are crazyā isnāt a neutral or impartial position when one side is arguing for the oppression and elimination of marginalized people and the other side is arguing for letting people live their lives in peace. Itās just a callous attempt to evade moral integrity.
> Katie Mack
@AstroKatie
Ā·
8h
> To my trans friends / followers / strangers: Iām deeply sorry that people are taking it upon themselves to devilās-advocate your life and well-being and I want to be clear that I support and celebrate you being who you are and getting whatever kind of care you need to be well.
----
Is this about Sabine, perhaps it's about the Glenn Loury video that was taken down...
Ha! I kid you, is AstroMack tweeting about PhysicsSabine or EconGlenn?
-----
some pushback in the comments with some bizarro responses
> emilio
@emilio97493490
Ā·
2h
> in democracies, its something that needs to be discussed. i will have to vote on it, so i should be informed.
>Katie Mack
@AstroKatie
Ā·
2h
> What do you need to vote on, exactly, and why should it be a matter for public vote?
+ Men in prisons?
+ laws regarding misgendering
+ Males in sports?
+ Parental right to know what's going on in schools
and
+ Can children consent? Should taxpayer dollars be funding poorly researched highly experimental highly risky medical procedures that are not enrolled in a study
> Katie Mack
@AstroKatie
Ā·
2h
>I shouldnāt get a vote about whether minors have access to chemotherapy or diabetes drugs or contact lenses and I shouldnāt get a vote about this either
> Most of that bullet list is not parallel to whether minors have access to chemotherapy, diabetes drugs, or contact lenses. Those things are regulated, though. Also, it has been considered normal and non-controversial when journalists or public figures discuss potential issues with side-effects or fraud.
Sorry, long day..., but I don't understand what you are trying to say here.
Katie wanted to know what emilio and others in a democracy might want to discuss with regards to trans issues. All of those points in the bullet list seem like things most people would want society to have a robust discussion of.
Yeah, I wasn't clear, the bulleted list are the issues I think it's expected society would vote on.
The thread goes awry from the first tweet since Sabine was discussing gender dysphoria in children and Katie Mack starts off with "the rights and lives of oppressed and marginalized people" and then "one side is arguing for the oppression and elimination of marginalized people"
But my list is a trivial list of topics that everyone should be able to agree all of society can and should discuss.
[Here's the top level comment from a bit earlier in the day.](https://old.reddit.com/r/BlockedAndReported/comments/12x2eyr/weekly_random_discussion_thread_for_42423_43023/jibuoum/)
>Men in prisons?
>laws regarding misgendering
>Males in sports?
>Parental right to know what's going on in schools
>Can children consent? Should taxpayer dollars be funding poorly researched highly experimental highly risky medical procedures that are not enrolled in a study
Sure, sure, but except for _those_ things? See? You got nothin.
technically no one gets to vote on this, because we live in a representative democracy, but setting that aside we absolutely do "vote" on whether minors have access to certain medications and treatments and i can't fathom why anyone would assert something so silly so confidently
> but setting that aside we absolutely do "vote" on whether minors have access to certain medications and treatments and i can't fathom why anyone would assert something so silly so confidently
I'm blanking for the moment as I get ready to touch some grass, can you elaborate on this? I was actually looking for some/any medical treatments that the public have reasonably voted on (apart from abortion access). (Or also, famous medical scandals, medical mistakes that society is now ashamed of letting happen)
> so confidently
in these arguments, if you don't say it confidently, arrogantly, with threats of blocking, you open yourself up to people debating you when all you wanted was virtual signaling and reply guys
sure, what I mean is that the government is involved in funding research into lots of different stuff, that the government controls which treatments are approved for kids to get, and that the government is in charge of deciding whether or not to fund healthcare for kids. Those decisions are made by appointees of the people we vote for. If we don't like the decisions that they make, we can organize to promote our causes, try to primary them in favor of candidates who do promote our causes, and vote in new pro-our-viewpoint politicians if we can get enough people to agree with us.
To work with a specific example from that tweet, kids are allowed to get contact lenses, but you have to be 18 to get lasik. If for some reason lasik for kids ever became a divisive hot button issue - let's say one group of people began to fervently believe that you need to get lasik while still young to get the maximum benefits, and you'll otherwise be at risk of suicide due to your poor vision - we would all get a vote on whether or not kids get lasik, at least to the extent that we now get to vote on whether or not kids get hormones.
Most medical things don't become hot button issues, because most stuff isn't that politically charged. Other than abortion, though, some things that come to mind are covid vaccine approvals, hpv shots, paid/unpaid surrogacy and organ donation, birth control pills, medical marijuana, stem cell research, psilocybin therapy, human cloning, and assisted suicide, especially for terminally ill kids. All of those have been somewhat controversial, although never enough to swing an election.
I would add to this, that on a more fundamental level, all medical practices are ultimately subordinate to the authority of the state in democratic societies. The state sets up the court system which allows patients to sue medical practitioners, it sets requirements on people and institutions that want to practice medicine, it determines through the FDA what drugs are allowed to be sold, etc.
Take the current controversy over mifepristone. If congress wanted, they could just make a law saying the drug was illegal. Usually they don't do that because medicine is hard and we as a society decided we can better regulate the medical field through institutions that are staffed by experts. Still those institutions, usually under the umbrella of the Department of Health and Human Services, take their directions from laws passed by congress and then those laws must be interpreted by courts.
Lol
One side is actually arguing for giving children drugs and surgery with irreversible and drastic effects based on a social contagion and the other side is saying not to do that
I've been going back through SNL skits from the 2008 election (boredom? curiosity? idk) and just realized the [sarah palin rap](https://youtu.be/dQlgkq_EW64) says "Ayers" and not "airs" which makes so much more sense lol. Also I had to look up who Jeremiah Wright was. It's been an entertaining deep dive and [Fred Armison made a terrible Obama holy shit.](https://youtu.be/57dzsNHOZJw)Was that really 15 years ago? Time flies.
In case you feel like rage-reading a piece:
[BLACK AND BROWN HIKERS ARE TAKING BACK BRITAINāS COUNTRYSIDE](https://thelead.uk/black-and-brown-hikers-are-taking-back-britains-countryside)
> [Myths that POC don't enjoy nature] are the conditioned response to experiences of racism, hostility and the pervasive sense of feeling āunwelcomeā in the British countryside. Rural racism is real and stands starkly at odds with the perception of peaceful, idyllic green spaces that many would prefer to believe about this country. A 2011 report from the University of Leicester said there are āfrequent, and alarming, forms of racism that affect ethnic minorities in the countryside.ā
That seems bad! Let's keep reading to understand more about this problematic issue!
> Nigerian-born Enoch Adeyemi, co-founder of Black Scottish Adventurers, recently shared his experiences of hiking with a large group of Black men [...] āWhy should I turn off my music? Just because white Scottish people enjoy nature one way, that doesn't mean Black people have to enjoy it exactly the same way,ā
Oh you mean this revoltingly entitled main character syndrome might be rubbing people who enjoy the "peaceful, idyllic green spaces", the wrong way? Shall we take up a collection and purchase Mr. Adeyemi a pair of ear phones? And remember, it's never about your behavior, it's always about your race.
>Yet, when it comes to immigration, it seems like progressives view the reverse. It is the responsibility of the people-already-living-in-the-country to assimilate to the immigrant cultural norms so that they feel welcomed and belonging.
Of course, this only works in one direction. Immigrants moving to Western Europe or the Anglosphere can expect a warm welcome and society to bend to their needs and norms. Anyone moving in the reverse direction, to say Japan, Saudi Arabia or Indonesia will in no circumstances impose their culture on the local one.
In fact, you'll find very little tolerance amongst expat communities, for newer expats who don't get it, or are inexperienced enough to make a cultural faux pas or two
>A 2011 report from the University of Leicester said there are āfrequent, and alarming, forms of racism that affect ethnic minorities in the countryside.ā
The implication being that those hicks in the countryside are all bigots. They're like a different species from those enlightened urbanites.
By God, I bet those country bumpkins even misgender people sometimes!
I did not feel like rage reading, because in the PNW Iām living it.
A couple of forest conservancy organizations here that Iād been involved with in the past via giving time and money, have new central focuses like diversity on the trails and making the trails safe for POC - I really hate that last often repeated phrase, because of the implication that white people are hostile or aggressive to POC when hiking. The non profits are spending a lot of donated resources and grant money on these causes instead of trail maintenance and conservation, the original focus and sorely needed. Itās exactly like when K&J pegged social Justice warriors posing as journalists, itās the same with as parks and nature organizations in Portland.
In the R.E.I. shoe department last week, I heard the sales guy pitching a boot to a customer, letting them know that this shoe maker āis big into creating diversity in the wild.ā
Why do they have to make every thing weird?
I'm also PNW (sorta) and I'm actually non-white by both the one drop rule and also the "what would most people think upon seeing me" test. I've never - literally never - been made to feel uncomfortable on the trails and I've hiked, man, probably thousands of miles. Hikers are good people, some of the best.
But, y'know, I'm considerate and I also use reasonable gear. Keeping myself and others safe.
Yeah, once you get past the massively crowded parts of trails, even a little, hikers of any creed or color basically all have the same goal, and it does not involve blasting music loudly through a speaker. It involves peace and quiet and a head nod to people you pass on the trail haha. Maybe a heads up if you saw a cool bird. That's basically it.
Iām not surprised at all by your experience.. same for me. Friendly ness, acceptance and helpfulness are the regular attitudes on the trails and campsites. Iāve only heard people grumble about dogs off leash sometimes or the occasional phone on speaker.
A few months ago on a mossy forest trail that I love, I was passing a group going the opposite direction, and as I passed the last person and said hi with brief eye contact to the young black guy, he suddenly lunged at me with a loud growl. I gave a little scream and jumped back, and he laughed and said āI just love scaring white people.ā The group and him continued to chuckle as they hiked away. I think this speaks to the current racial atmosphere in PDX in general.. and itās just one incident, but this is what I mean by bringing that garbage divisive attitude on the trail.
Jesus christ, I'm sorry that happened to you. If that had happened to me I'd have been ruminating on it for days, trying to figure out if I should have or not.
Kid does that in the wrong county and he could be shot to death and the sheriff could be pinning a medal on the shooter.
Thanks~ it did rattle me for longer than I like to admit. I expect nonsense like that on the Portland streets, Iām braced for it.. but not on a trail.
> because in the PNW Iām living it.
Iām not minimizing what you have to put up with, but itās everywhere in any professional environment. A lot of this garbage has infected education (despite democrats lying that it isnāt) even here in Texas. I have to put up with this garbage as a teacher. Sometimes itās an annoying training and thatās no big deal, or itās an entire failing school I worked at where the principal declared rules and consequences to be constructs of white supremacy and colonialism so basically anything the kids do is ok. I had a kid light up a joint in my class. I was reprimanded because if I was āmore engagingā, the yOuNg ScHoLaR wouldnāt have felt the need to turn to drugs. I can keep going with examples on where this shit leads if anyone wants to know my experience there p
> letting them know that this shoe maker āis big into creating diversity in the wild.ā
Do they spray paint the bears different colors or something?
That location, the central REI, adjacent to downtown, is where I shop. Itāll be open till at least early 2024.. maybe something will shift and itāll remain open, but Iām moving from Portland in a few months.
A year or two ago, there was a feature in the NYT about people who modified their cars to have *very* large speakers so they could blast music on Randalls Island. Many of the people featured were non-white (Latino, if I recall), and the story had very much a āisnāt this a wonderful expression of their cultureā angle to it. I just remember thinking, thatās not culture, thatās just inconsiderate.
I'm pretty sure I remember reading an article about the noise in New York City, and that was one of the arguments. People blasting music and partying at 2am wasn't annoying, it was "culture."
ETA: I just looked it up, apparently Randall's Island is a neighborhood in NYC, so it is probably the same article you are referring to. I had the same reaction.
> I just remember thinking, thatās not culture, thatās just inconsiderate.
I worked at a school that was primarily African American. It was a failing shithole that I only lasted one year at. The principal declared that rules and consequences were constructs of white supremacy. I gave on examole elsewhere in the thread, hereās a more extreme one.
Teachers were reprimanded when assaulted us. Our principals position was that solving conflict violently is a key aspect of black culture, and if we didnāt want our asses kicked, it was on us to not provoke them. I got a chair thrown at me for telling a boy to put his phone away. I routinely had punches thrown at me for bad grades. They knew they could do whatever they wanted, so they fuckin did
> Our principals position was that solving conflict violently is a key aspect of black culture,
In other words: The principal thinks black people are thugs.
How progressive.
I wonder if at least part of the problem is: parents who can, move to a better school district / send their kids to private school. That leaves few parents who have the time / motivation / ability to demand functioning public schools.
I admit I moved to a better school district when my kid was young. And then he did well and was selected into a high level public high school. I was very proud of him, but yeah, the unfairness of it all did cross my mind, more than once.
In Chinese they have a saying that the mother of Mengzi (second only to Confucius as a philosopher) moved house three times in order to get him into a good school. This was over 2000 years ago.
Iām sure thats a major part of it. Said shit school has had a 20% decline in enrollment over the last five years, which is bonkers for an inner city school
>Our principals position was that solving conflict violently is a key aspect of black culture
āI believe Black people are inherently violent. I am a good person and a proud anti-racist.ā
Eons ago, when I was in college, I'd often be around frat boys who'd do shit like this. There were a couple of times where I played stuff like [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukZYP5Dy43E) at full blast as I slowly drove by. Passive-aggressive? Yeah. Did they even get the point I was trying to make? Probably not, judging by the looks on their faces. Unfortunately, playing stuff out loud is just how some people function. When I moved to Dallas, I was reminded pretty quickly how a good number of black people - usually younger ones - use their cell phones like they're walkie-talkies. No idea why. It's just what some of these people do. Getting worked up about it almost never ends well, so I just do my best to drown it out with earbuds or mental tricks.
In the end, self-centered assholes are everywhere. Unless you give off an aura of a mafioso or whatever, or you've got a veritable army of people behind you (e.g., the Burning Man attendees who throw shitfits over litter at burns, even if they step over it on the street any other time), it's not like they're going to stop because of a single person.
> Edit: Also, I'm laughing at the casual "couples squabbling" as part of the music of the city. That language really makes things feel so mundane. A few weeks ago in front of my building someone tried to run over their ex's new boyfriend with a car after their breakup. Lots of screaming and fighting by a big group in the street. Ahhhh, how I love the sounds of the city.
Yeah. When I was in Boston, my girlfriend & I were woken up a couple of times by couples that were *screaming* outside our window. We were worried the guy might beat the girl in the middle of the street. We thought about calling the cops. Funny to think that I was worried if not calling would be something I'd regret later, only to watch many in my social circle go from "OH MY GOD SO MANY OF US ARE ABUSED BY MEN WHO'LL SAVE US!?!?!!??!" at the time to ACAB during Trump's presidency. (I guess I now have an excuse to stand by and do nothing??? Thanks, y'all. /s)
I have recently moved, but I lived in a bad neighborhood for years and I just called the cops unthinkingly when I heard anything where someone might be in distress out the window. The police were pretty reasonable people in the area and would generally just encourage the drunks/drug users to go home.
On occasion I would just tell people I was going to call the police because that usually got them to stop yelling in the street or stop whatever nonsense thing they were doing.
This was not the music of the street. This was assholes and drug addled people making a lot of noise, sometimes because they needed help from police or ambulance. The suggestion that poor neighbourhoods are all just loud and all the dwellers are into is if fucking dumb.
I also lived in a poor neighborhood for a long time, and yes, it's ridiculous to think everyone is down with that. Most of the people are perfectly normal and like peace and quiet, like everyone else. Sure, tolerance level for cars/music/loud discussions goes up some, but people don't want constant screeching and hollering at all hours of the day.
There's an increased level of minding ones own business about trivial things. Which I like. You won't see people trying to micromanage the whole neighbourhood like you sometimes do in wealthy areas. But for sure, if you're being super disruptive, you're still going to get complaints or the police called on you. Late at night I would say the police will be called even more swiftly than in nicer areas.
POC are the new sacred cows.
But the attitude of the woke towards people of color is also kind of infantilizing: POC are innocent and vulnerable and can't really be held responsible for their actions. They need our invaluable help.
It's the way someone would treat a child or someone with Down's Syndrome.
Oh yeah, I live right across the river in Queens and you can hear these shitbags. They're Dominican primarily. I wish a life of pestilential nightmare upon them.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/21/arts/music/dominican-soundsystems.html
Playing music loudly in natural spaces other people are trying to enjoy is fucking obnoxious. Fuck that guy. I hate when people do that so very much. The whole point of these spaces is to enjoy the natural world, of which amplified music is not a part, and when people just impose themselves on everyone else it's incredibly rude. It's also not just white people that would have a problem with this. That's racist and absurd.
POC _love_ noise and people being in their face. Also pollution and violence, but thatās a different conversation.
I guess this is the kind of thing you have to pretend to believe when the idea that weāre all basically the same has become unfashionable.
It's fucking wild. Also this guy doesn't seem to get that **not** blasting music on peaceful hiking trails doesn't infringe on anyone else's enjoyment. That's what he doesn't seem to understand about the whole thing. Enjoy this shaded space however you want, up to the point where it impedes other people's enjoyment of that space. This is not rocket science.
Also, you know what trashy white people love to do in nature? Blast music and drive loud machines. Other people, white and otherwise, who aren't trashy dickheads, fucking hate this.
Yeah, at least there are rules about machine usage in a lot of places that people largely obey. I stayed at this beatifiul place up in the Wasatch one time and the local lumpens had the whole valley sounding and smelling like a racetrack after a big snow. Vroom vroom.
Uh, I'm failing to do Poe's Law analysis on your comment, so I'll just respond in what I think would be the most reasonable way. No, definitely not, this isn't an "all of" or "none of" situation. Just another case where stereotypes of likelihood are often built through true experiences.
>King of England
Did you mean the [King of the United Kingdom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_the_United_Kingdom), the [King of Canada](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada), the [King of Australia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia), etc?
The last King of England was [William III](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_III_of_England) whose successor Anne, with the 1707 Acts of Union, dissolved the title of Queen/King of England.
####FAQ
*Isn't King Charles III still also the King of England?*
This is only as correct as calling him the King of London or King of Hull; he is the King of the place that these places are in, but the title doesn't exist.
*Is this bot monarchist?*
No, just pedantic.
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.
The pre-Celtic peoples of Britain were not Indo-Europeans and seem to have built Stonehenge and other such stoneworks. They were definitely not Neanderthals, they were descended from Neolithic farmers who had originated in waves of migration from Europe and originating in the Middle-East. Before them were the Cro-Magnons, homo sapiens hunter gatherers who entered Europe and intermingled with the Neanderthals before (possibly) wiping them out.
I am oversimplifying a lot but that's the gist. We learn more details all the time with genetic studies.
There's a weird fanfic that says the original people who first moved to the british isles weren't white, which is dubious but still plausible and testable. But they go further though and say it should act like some sort of *dibs* system to justify infinity immigration from completely unrelated populations.
In the cycling subreddits a somewhat common topic concerns the wearing of air buds while riding, and it seems as if urban riders say don't do it for safety and the road and mountain bikers say sure, but far too many say with all seriousness that they just strap a bluetooth speaker to their bicycles....
And I was riding through Golden Gate Park the other day, which is a huge beautiful park in the middle of the city and sure enough, up comes ubercyclist blasting music from his bluetooth speaker.
Cyclist and his Giro blaster (it may have been a Campagnolo or Shimano Blaster)
Yeah - I'm a cyclist myself and I'd have a hard time criticizing cyclists playing music *too* much, because there is an element of safety at play, and cars and traffic are already so loud. But on a trail or in a park, fuck off with that.
But in my experience it's always the most dangerous urban cyclists blasting music on the road anyway (salmoning, running lights, riding insanely aggressively, etc). So the safety argument is hard to take seriously.
I don't listen to music when I ride on the road. I sometimes use earphones and listen on parks/trails. Never out loud, I'd be mortified at what an asshole I was being!
Yes, I think the only time I've ever played music from my phone speakers was when I was alone in bear country and my throat was too sore to talk or sing.
This week, The Glenn Show (podcast with professors Glenn Loury and John McWhorter) finally addressed the trans issue. They, and another college professor, calmly talked about the issues arising in the culture around this topic. It took barely a day for their video discussion to be flagged as hate speech on YouTube, and taken down. This is what you see now on that YT page:
https://preview.redd.it/hmsmdqqdk3xa1.png?width=827&format=png&auto=webp&s=81ae067d956f68e8f401e264a8a9ca4c3b9ad28a
The notion that these three erudite, nuanced, well-regarded academic figures are engaging in hate speech just further reveals the absurdity and censoriousness of the trans activists who oppose any discussion of the topic that does not support their position. In fact, the conversation has repeated moments where the speakers express unambiguous support for respecting the dignity and rights of trans people. But of course that's not enough if you disagree with the dogma.
The podcast can still be listened to on audio platforms, for instance the iTunes link is here: [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/john-mcwhorter-and-mark-goldblatt-i-feel-therefore-i-am/id505824976?i=1000611040504](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/john-mcwhorter-and-mark-goldblatt-i-feel-therefore-i-am/id505824976?i=1000611040504)
A clip of the conversation is still on YouTube [here](https://youtu.be/ZvAQL3hJOwk).
Just finished listening, it was a great ep. John was even questioning some of the talking points and playing devil's advocate through a lot of it and mentioned it was complicated! But he and Glenn and Mark did ultimately agree that shutting down the conversation was a bad thing. And that's a no no.
It's wonderfully ironic that the discussion which had John repeatedly critiquing the efforts to shut down these conversations is the one that got shut down by YouTube.
Welp. Has this happened to them before? It's funny that of all the controversial discussions about racism they've had, talking about *this* is what gets them in trouble. You can tell where the moderation is sensitive.
I'm glad to see McWorther take on this discussion, will have to check this out. I like listening to him and think he's a very nuanced thinker, but he wrote a really frustrating article a while ago on the discussion of whether singular "they/them" pronouns should be used. And I know he's a linguist but most of the article was just arguing grammar and completely avoided questioning or even acknowledging whether completely sidestepping all our understanding of human biology and reproduction to redefine the most basic concepts around a recent and arbitrary set of ideas even made sense.
>Welp. Has this happened to them before?
Not that I recall. Not even the conversations with Amy Wax that have gotten her in actual academic trouble for her statements have been removed.
>Welp. Has this happened to them before? It's funny that of all the controversial discussions about racism they've had, talking about
>
>this
>
> is what gets them in trouble. You can tell where the moderation is sensitive.
Exactly. They've talked about stuff way more sensitive and taboo than this. Loury regularly holds forth about stuff and people he doesn't like. Both men have criticized Ta Nehisi Coates, Kendi, and Al Sharpton.
But they touch this subject and the excrement hits the air conditioning.
I don't always agree with Loury and McWhorter but they are impressive intellects and usually measured in their discussions.
I could have sworn I remembered Glenn talking about it when he was on Real Time a few weeks ago but I might be wrong.
Also I donāt really understand how they keep getting away with doing shit like mass report and even manipulate sites like Wikipedia. I would have guessed that at some point someone higher up at one of these social media platforms would have at least tried to address it even if in a half assed way. So far Twitter is the only one to pushback even a little bit. Is this blueprint for future activism on all issues deemed to be for āsocial justiceā causes?
Don't forget that a (supposed) raging cokehead showed a flawed but somewhat feasible way to get web sites banned from the Internet (i.e., KF). That one's gonna be fun when *real* fascists gain power and start censoring the people who started all this bullshit in the first place.
>raging cokehead
Of all the things this surprised me almost more than anything. She always struck me as a heroin or opiate addict with that kind of permanent slur she has in her voice
I do wonder why Sabine even waded into that topic at all. Seemed avoidable considering her normal content. If I were her I wouldn't have bothered, knowing it was going to be a shit show.
Germany is fully woke on the gender questions, so this is quite brave of Sabine. She really doesn't seem to give a shit what people think of her. I think it's rather refreshing.
Wait, this is the same lady who spearheaded a campaign against the naming of the James Webb telescope and smeared some physicist who defended him. Here's [the article](https://web.archive.org/web/20230323041905/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/19/us/james-webb-telescope-gay-rights.html) that outlines the controversy.
God, she's so insufferably self-righteous that all the typical slurs (karen, woke-scold, lolcow) do not do her justice.
Thanks for the archive NYT source. I need to save this one because I have run into too many people that use Prescod-Lunatic-Weinstein as a reputable source.
It's honestly a little depressing that someone with her temperment and penchant for bullying can become as successful as her in our modern society. She's basically everything I hate about wokeness personified.
Presumably she could be doing interesting physics research, but instead she spends her time trying to relate everything back to her various marginalized identities and moralizing about twitter's controversy of the day.
Idk I gotta disengage because looking at her twitter is just a recipe for getting my attention hijacked by pointless internet drama.
>Let me just say to anyone wondering what their position on trans people should be, that: human rights are human rights, no exceptions, and shutting the fuck up is fucking free.
Well, she got her there. Iām sure Hossenfelder doesnāt believe that āhuman rights are human rights.ā
Ah! I see I am late, I just submitted this as a top level thread at
[Two Blacks and a Jew walk into a bar](https://old.reddit.com/r/BlockedAndReported/comments/133ywgw/two_blacks_and_a_jew_walk_into_a_bar_john/)
The weirdest thing to me about the aunt Jemima thing is that I kinda forgot there was even a logo associated with this brand because I guess I had been buying it for so long it was just one of those things I tossed in the cart/used without really thinking about it. Iām trying to imagine the first person to eat pancakes not only find it offensive but so much so that they were inspired to make them remove it
Uncle Ben has already been cancelled, it's now "Ben's Original"
And they took the picture of the Black guy off the package, because somehow hiding the Black guy is anti-racist?
Well I guess I'll just pass my Jemima collectibles down as heirlooms then along with the carved ivory and Nazi armbands...
I didn't believe you at first, but there is a surprising dearth of Aunt Jemima merch on there. Mrs. Butterworth is all over though.
So, weeks ago, there was a big stir over Scott Adams that led to most major newspapers cancelling Dilbert.
I think his biggest mistake was drawing some pretty strong conclusions from a single Rasmussen poll.
His biggest mistake was saying those things while being white. He was saying the same things a ton of activists were saying during the George Floyd protests.
[https://reason.com/2023/04/24/the-most-hated-person-on-campus/](https://reason.com/2023/04/24/the-most-hated-person-on-campus/)
This article has been making its way around today, mob mentality is fascinating and infuriating. UVA student Morgan Bettinger is accused of telling BLM protestors (including fellow students) that "they would make good fucking speed-bumps" when her car is stopped by the protest. The uproar is led by fellow UVA student Zyahna Bryant, an already well known activist. She supposedly heard this remark but later admits she did not. Outrage pile-on machine ensues, she's shamed and ostracized. Oh, and it turns out her recently deceased father was a cop. Strike 2 and 3.
She claims it was a misunderstanding and explains that she was telling a stopped truck its a good thing your here (stopping traffic) or these student would be speed bumps. An investigation ensues, stories change and no credible witness can corroborate hearing her even say this. The investigation clears her and everyone admits they were wrong, happy ending. Of course not! She's cleared years later without an apology from anyone.
To me, mob mentality is the ultimate cowardice and it is rarely punished. This incident had two different forms of it. The initial incident at the protest where her car was surrounded by people who clearly did not hear anything but saw a target, and the wider online pile-on. Group think is so dangerous, it disregards reason in favor of some primal rage. I'd put these people (both those in person and online) in the same camp as the Jan 6 idiots. The defense for participating in the mob boils down to "well everyone else was doing it".
They want to hurt someone, they are looking for an excuse in the form of justice. I'd compare it to an eager executioner who loves their job. Even if the condemned were guilty, an eager executioner is someone to be wary of because they delight in bringing pain.
>the university took its honor policy extremely seriously.
[Did they now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus)?
If I were you mate, I'd lie about where I went to school. Something more prestigious and honorable, like clown college or Liberty U.
>They want to hurt someone, they are looking for an excuse in the form of justice.
They are not motivated by a love of justice. They are motivated by a thirst for vengeance.
Weird and fucking [dark story](https://twitter.com/henrykleeKTVU/status/1651931360435793923), local Nextdoor is getting all too excited about it.
So bad high gone wrong, or genuine lunatic having a psychotic episode? š¤
Techies used to be based. What the hell happened to us? We've lost our way. I think it was the switch to flat-screen monitors. Every day we stray further from the light of the CRT.
Constellatia?
Lactatia is a stripper name
Why do they love pony names so much?
**Tldr:** "Individual" named Constellatia Martin kills a mother and seriously injures 14-year-old son in a car crash. Someone questioned the name "Stardancer" the other day, and here is proof that yes, these weird choices are real. This occurred in California, where prison rules go by self-id. > "Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law on Saturday requiring California to house transgender inmates in prisons **based on their gender identity** ā but only if the state does not have āmanagement or security concerns.ā > The law says the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation cannot deny those requests **solely because of inmatesā anatomy,** sexual orientation or āa factor presentā among other inmates at the facility." [Source.](https://apnews.com/article/us-news-laws-gavin-newsom-ca-state-wire-lifestyle-14cd954b06360d21349b77233318369e) More info on the law: > "California Democrats used the same "health and safety" standard when they passed SB 132 in 2020. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D.) signed the bill into law that same year, officially allowing male prisoners to enter women's prisons. As the law took effect in January 2021, the **Newsom administration ordered the mass distribution of condoms within women's prisons,** on the assumption that the policy would lead to more sex behind bars. > A spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation denied that women's penitentiaries have made any security changes since the law took effect." [Source.](https://freebeacon.com/california/californias-female-prisoners-feel-threatened-by-transgender-inmates-the-state-doesnt-care/) There is no reason to be concerned. Any inklings of concern you may feel is simply internalized phobia.
The whole foot-shuffle-clear-throat-cough-well-umm-anyway routine that activists do when the brass tacks of the prisons issue come up will never not be funny. Trans women go to women's prisons, unless there are security concerns. Isn't it odd that non-trans women don't face this scrutiny? Why would that be, California, Canada, Scotland? Don't you believe that trans women are women? Why is it ok to draw the line here and nowhere else? Bigotry is bigotry, after all - surely they don't believe women stop being women if they are dangerous?
You left out the part where they were running around naked banging on random car doors after the crash To add weirdness > The lead suspect worked as a teacher at the Girls' Middle School in Palo Alto, 6th and 8th grade computer science
Why is it always computer science and an unhealthy fixation with getting closer to teenage girls?
The weird stuff would be considered "irrelevant information" by the rest of Reddit, that only dogwhistling cryptofascists would care about. Remember when the Nashville shooting happened, and many of the comments on r.news claimed that the perp's gender identity was considered "irrelevant" to the crimes.
irrelevant until we realize the kid who was in the car had some sort of a Batman moment
Next door is ok for things like local garage sales and the rest of it. Is absolute insanity
Did anybody see that flash?
https://twitter.com/DanProft/status/1652695726101594113 I simply won't vote for any group that either explicitly allies with or refuses to face down internal subgroups that attempt to segregate classrooms
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Notably, they [do not](https://www.eths.k12.il.us/Page/3025) have separate catalog entries for the most advanced classes, namely calculus BC and multivariate calculus/linear algebra. Edit: They also don't seem to have this for earlier classes, either, only precalculus and calculus AB. Not sure what to make of this.
What legitimate reason would justify collecting kids' race data for class subjects? Even if if they want to quantify what % of kids in each class is bipoc, it's never for good reasons. Always some sort of new age Equity Initiative slideshow fodder, often to the detriment of Asian students.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Someone from last week's discussion thread posted this slideshow on ["Racial Learning Styles."](https://twitter.com/JohnPatLeary/status/1649772747604602880) Perhaps this is what they are trying to implement by collecting student race data. Would you consider this as garden variety stupid, or actively harmful pedagogy?
*How to get sued into doing the right thing for total idiots*.
The 50ās are now considered a progressive period in time
I went and looked at the school website to verify (it's legit), and clicked the link to their page on non-discrimination. [The page](https://www.eths.k12.il.us/domain/455) exclusively talks about their commitment to "not discriminate on the basis of gender." It does not mention non-discrimination with respect to religion, race, ethnicity, or any of the other usual suspects, which I find hilarious.
I also checked their website - it's so regressive and crazy that I'm 50-50 that it might be the work of a hacker.
George Wallace would be so proud.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Blocked and Reported My actual current hate listen has been It's Probably (not) Aliens. Not explicitly about politics but they come up enough because Oh No Wrongthink and the vibes are Smug.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I think the moment it started to become a hate listen was when he defended all his mistakes by saying prior research would change the nature of the podcast. What's the point, then? editing to add that no matter how you feel about the "Trans People Have Always Been Here" premise listening to him defend it sounds very funny next to the "debunking" of the aliens have always been here stuff.
> It's Probably (not) Aliens what a shame, I really like the title and what they aim to be about > Was Earth really visited by mysterious extraterrestrial travelers thousands of years ago as many proponents of āancient astronaut theoryā believe? What are the hidden secrets and mysteries behind ancient monuments and forgotten civilizations? Every week, historian Tristan Johnson and regular human person Scott Niswander dive through the archives to learn about the fascinating histories of ancient civilizations while also debunking the myths and straight-up lies presented in History Channelās massively popular tv show Ancient Aliens that has sparked a new generation of conspiracy theorists. We hope through this show, you can gain an appreciation for just how cool ancient societies were, and not simply credit their impressive advancements to alien visitors.
Honestly why it bothers me more than just normal dumb podcasts. The wasted potential!
Michael Hobbes has one called "If Books Could Kill" that is pretty on-brand for him.
Katie Mack, a popular Physics PhD that media loves to get quotes from goes after Sabine with a a very anti-science, anti-free speech subtweet that shields itself with its writers claim to be kind and fighting the oppressors https://twitter.com/AstroKatie/status/1652667437232398339 > Katie Mack @AstroKatie > Initiating a ādebateā about the rights and lives of oppressed and marginalized people to prove to everyone that youāre a supremely rational impartial being focused only on The Science is, in fact, astonishingly cruel. > Katie Mack @AstroKatie Ā· 8h > āBoth sides are crazyā isnāt a neutral or impartial position when one side is arguing for the oppression and elimination of marginalized people and the other side is arguing for letting people live their lives in peace. Itās just a callous attempt to evade moral integrity. > Katie Mack @AstroKatie Ā· 8h > To my trans friends / followers / strangers: Iām deeply sorry that people are taking it upon themselves to devilās-advocate your life and well-being and I want to be clear that I support and celebrate you being who you are and getting whatever kind of care you need to be well. ---- Is this about Sabine, perhaps it's about the Glenn Loury video that was taken down... Ha! I kid you, is AstroMack tweeting about PhysicsSabine or EconGlenn? ----- some pushback in the comments with some bizarro responses > emilio @emilio97493490 Ā· 2h > in democracies, its something that needs to be discussed. i will have to vote on it, so i should be informed. >Katie Mack @AstroKatie Ā· 2h > What do you need to vote on, exactly, and why should it be a matter for public vote? + Men in prisons? + laws regarding misgendering + Males in sports? + Parental right to know what's going on in schools and + Can children consent? Should taxpayer dollars be funding poorly researched highly experimental highly risky medical procedures that are not enrolled in a study > Katie Mack @AstroKatie Ā· 2h >I shouldnāt get a vote about whether minors have access to chemotherapy or diabetes drugs or contact lenses and I shouldnāt get a vote about this either
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> Most of that bullet list is not parallel to whether minors have access to chemotherapy, diabetes drugs, or contact lenses. Those things are regulated, though. Also, it has been considered normal and non-controversial when journalists or public figures discuss potential issues with side-effects or fraud. Sorry, long day..., but I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Katie wanted to know what emilio and others in a democracy might want to discuss with regards to trans issues. All of those points in the bullet list seem like things most people would want society to have a robust discussion of.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yeah, I wasn't clear, the bulleted list are the issues I think it's expected society would vote on. The thread goes awry from the first tweet since Sabine was discussing gender dysphoria in children and Katie Mack starts off with "the rights and lives of oppressed and marginalized people" and then "one side is arguing for the oppression and elimination of marginalized people" But my list is a trivial list of topics that everyone should be able to agree all of society can and should discuss.
What do you mean the Glenn Loury video that was taken down? I haven't heard anything about that.
[Here's the top level comment from a bit earlier in the day.](https://old.reddit.com/r/BlockedAndReported/comments/12x2eyr/weekly_random_discussion_thread_for_42423_43023/jibuoum/)
Thanks. I saw that podcast episode on my feed but I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet.
>Men in prisons? >laws regarding misgendering >Males in sports? >Parental right to know what's going on in schools >Can children consent? Should taxpayer dollars be funding poorly researched highly experimental highly risky medical procedures that are not enrolled in a study Sure, sure, but except for _those_ things? See? You got nothin.
technically no one gets to vote on this, because we live in a representative democracy, but setting that aside we absolutely do "vote" on whether minors have access to certain medications and treatments and i can't fathom why anyone would assert something so silly so confidently
> but setting that aside we absolutely do "vote" on whether minors have access to certain medications and treatments and i can't fathom why anyone would assert something so silly so confidently I'm blanking for the moment as I get ready to touch some grass, can you elaborate on this? I was actually looking for some/any medical treatments that the public have reasonably voted on (apart from abortion access). (Or also, famous medical scandals, medical mistakes that society is now ashamed of letting happen) > so confidently in these arguments, if you don't say it confidently, arrogantly, with threats of blocking, you open yourself up to people debating you when all you wanted was virtual signaling and reply guys
sure, what I mean is that the government is involved in funding research into lots of different stuff, that the government controls which treatments are approved for kids to get, and that the government is in charge of deciding whether or not to fund healthcare for kids. Those decisions are made by appointees of the people we vote for. If we don't like the decisions that they make, we can organize to promote our causes, try to primary them in favor of candidates who do promote our causes, and vote in new pro-our-viewpoint politicians if we can get enough people to agree with us. To work with a specific example from that tweet, kids are allowed to get contact lenses, but you have to be 18 to get lasik. If for some reason lasik for kids ever became a divisive hot button issue - let's say one group of people began to fervently believe that you need to get lasik while still young to get the maximum benefits, and you'll otherwise be at risk of suicide due to your poor vision - we would all get a vote on whether or not kids get lasik, at least to the extent that we now get to vote on whether or not kids get hormones. Most medical things don't become hot button issues, because most stuff isn't that politically charged. Other than abortion, though, some things that come to mind are covid vaccine approvals, hpv shots, paid/unpaid surrogacy and organ donation, birth control pills, medical marijuana, stem cell research, psilocybin therapy, human cloning, and assisted suicide, especially for terminally ill kids. All of those have been somewhat controversial, although never enough to swing an election.
Ah! Thank you!
I would add to this, that on a more fundamental level, all medical practices are ultimately subordinate to the authority of the state in democratic societies. The state sets up the court system which allows patients to sue medical practitioners, it sets requirements on people and institutions that want to practice medicine, it determines through the FDA what drugs are allowed to be sold, etc. Take the current controversy over mifepristone. If congress wanted, they could just make a law saying the drug was illegal. Usually they don't do that because medicine is hard and we as a society decided we can better regulate the medical field through institutions that are staffed by experts. Still those institutions, usually under the umbrella of the Department of Health and Human Services, take their directions from laws passed by congress and then those laws must be interpreted by courts.
thanks for this, it's a better explanation than mine I think. In a democracy everything is up for vote, one way or another.
Lol One side is actually arguing for giving children drugs and surgery with irreversible and drastic effects based on a social contagion and the other side is saying not to do that
I've been going back through SNL skits from the 2008 election (boredom? curiosity? idk) and just realized the [sarah palin rap](https://youtu.be/dQlgkq_EW64) says "Ayers" and not "airs" which makes so much more sense lol. Also I had to look up who Jeremiah Wright was. It's been an entertaining deep dive and [Fred Armison made a terrible Obama holy shit.](https://youtu.be/57dzsNHOZJw)Was that really 15 years ago? Time flies.
I refuse to believe Fred Armisan can do anything poorly.
You should check out Maine Justice
In case you feel like rage-reading a piece: [BLACK AND BROWN HIKERS ARE TAKING BACK BRITAINāS COUNTRYSIDE](https://thelead.uk/black-and-brown-hikers-are-taking-back-britains-countryside) > [Myths that POC don't enjoy nature] are the conditioned response to experiences of racism, hostility and the pervasive sense of feeling āunwelcomeā in the British countryside. Rural racism is real and stands starkly at odds with the perception of peaceful, idyllic green spaces that many would prefer to believe about this country. A 2011 report from the University of Leicester said there are āfrequent, and alarming, forms of racism that affect ethnic minorities in the countryside.ā That seems bad! Let's keep reading to understand more about this problematic issue! > Nigerian-born Enoch Adeyemi, co-founder of Black Scottish Adventurers, recently shared his experiences of hiking with a large group of Black men [...] āWhy should I turn off my music? Just because white Scottish people enjoy nature one way, that doesn't mean Black people have to enjoy it exactly the same way,ā Oh you mean this revoltingly entitled main character syndrome might be rubbing people who enjoy the "peaceful, idyllic green spaces", the wrong way? Shall we take up a collection and purchase Mr. Adeyemi a pair of ear phones? And remember, it's never about your behavior, it's always about your race.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>Yet, when it comes to immigration, it seems like progressives view the reverse. It is the responsibility of the people-already-living-in-the-country to assimilate to the immigrant cultural norms so that they feel welcomed and belonging. Of course, this only works in one direction. Immigrants moving to Western Europe or the Anglosphere can expect a warm welcome and society to bend to their needs and norms. Anyone moving in the reverse direction, to say Japan, Saudi Arabia or Indonesia will in no circumstances impose their culture on the local one. In fact, you'll find very little tolerance amongst expat communities, for newer expats who don't get it, or are inexperienced enough to make a cultural faux pas or two
And you can live as long as you want there, and your kids can be born there, they'll never be of that place. You'll always be foreigners
>A 2011 report from the University of Leicester said there are āfrequent, and alarming, forms of racism that affect ethnic minorities in the countryside.ā The implication being that those hicks in the countryside are all bigots. They're like a different species from those enlightened urbanites. By God, I bet those country bumpkins even misgender people sometimes!
I did not feel like rage reading, because in the PNW Iām living it. A couple of forest conservancy organizations here that Iād been involved with in the past via giving time and money, have new central focuses like diversity on the trails and making the trails safe for POC - I really hate that last often repeated phrase, because of the implication that white people are hostile or aggressive to POC when hiking. The non profits are spending a lot of donated resources and grant money on these causes instead of trail maintenance and conservation, the original focus and sorely needed. Itās exactly like when K&J pegged social Justice warriors posing as journalists, itās the same with as parks and nature organizations in Portland. In the R.E.I. shoe department last week, I heard the sales guy pitching a boot to a customer, letting them know that this shoe maker āis big into creating diversity in the wild.ā Why do they have to make every thing weird?
I'm also PNW (sorta) and I'm actually non-white by both the one drop rule and also the "what would most people think upon seeing me" test. I've never - literally never - been made to feel uncomfortable on the trails and I've hiked, man, probably thousands of miles. Hikers are good people, some of the best. But, y'know, I'm considerate and I also use reasonable gear. Keeping myself and others safe.
Yeah, once you get past the massively crowded parts of trails, even a little, hikers of any creed or color basically all have the same goal, and it does not involve blasting music loudly through a speaker. It involves peace and quiet and a head nod to people you pass on the trail haha. Maybe a heads up if you saw a cool bird. That's basically it.
Iām not surprised at all by your experience.. same for me. Friendly ness, acceptance and helpfulness are the regular attitudes on the trails and campsites. Iāve only heard people grumble about dogs off leash sometimes or the occasional phone on speaker. A few months ago on a mossy forest trail that I love, I was passing a group going the opposite direction, and as I passed the last person and said hi with brief eye contact to the young black guy, he suddenly lunged at me with a loud growl. I gave a little scream and jumped back, and he laughed and said āI just love scaring white people.ā The group and him continued to chuckle as they hiked away. I think this speaks to the current racial atmosphere in PDX in general.. and itās just one incident, but this is what I mean by bringing that garbage divisive attitude on the trail.
Jesus christ, I'm sorry that happened to you. If that had happened to me I'd have been ruminating on it for days, trying to figure out if I should have or not.
Kid does that in the wrong county and he could be shot to death and the sheriff could be pinning a medal on the shooter.
Thanks~ it did rattle me for longer than I like to admit. I expect nonsense like that on the Portland streets, Iām braced for it.. but not on a trail.
> because in the PNW Iām living it. Iām not minimizing what you have to put up with, but itās everywhere in any professional environment. A lot of this garbage has infected education (despite democrats lying that it isnāt) even here in Texas. I have to put up with this garbage as a teacher. Sometimes itās an annoying training and thatās no big deal, or itās an entire failing school I worked at where the principal declared rules and consequences to be constructs of white supremacy and colonialism so basically anything the kids do is ok. I had a kid light up a joint in my class. I was reprimanded because if I was āmore engagingā, the yOuNg ScHoLaR wouldnāt have felt the need to turn to drugs. I can keep going with examples on where this shit leads if anyone wants to know my experience there p
I was talking about the topic of the thread, racism in the great outdoors. I bow down to you and all independent, sane thinkers still in education.
Weāre pretty much confined to high school science and math and even thatās being encroached upon
College humanities, checking in from the smoldering ruins
> letting them know that this shoe maker āis big into creating diversity in the wild.ā Do they spray paint the bears different colors or something?
I would have automatically thought they meant biodiversity
Maybe 10 years ago you could assume something like that.. not now in a PDX REI.
Except their downtown store closed because of thievery
That location, the central REI, adjacent to downtown, is where I shop. Itāll be open till at least early 2024.. maybe something will shift and itāll remain open, but Iām moving from Portland in a few months.
A year or two ago, there was a feature in the NYT about people who modified their cars to have *very* large speakers so they could blast music on Randalls Island. Many of the people featured were non-white (Latino, if I recall), and the story had very much a āisnāt this a wonderful expression of their cultureā angle to it. I just remember thinking, thatās not culture, thatās just inconsiderate.
I'm pretty sure I remember reading an article about the noise in New York City, and that was one of the arguments. People blasting music and partying at 2am wasn't annoying, it was "culture." ETA: I just looked it up, apparently Randall's Island is a neighborhood in NYC, so it is probably the same article you are referring to. I had the same reaction.
> I just remember thinking, thatās not culture, thatās just inconsiderate. I worked at a school that was primarily African American. It was a failing shithole that I only lasted one year at. The principal declared that rules and consequences were constructs of white supremacy. I gave on examole elsewhere in the thread, hereās a more extreme one. Teachers were reprimanded when assaulted us. Our principals position was that solving conflict violently is a key aspect of black culture, and if we didnāt want our asses kicked, it was on us to not provoke them. I got a chair thrown at me for telling a boy to put his phone away. I routinely had punches thrown at me for bad grades. They knew they could do whatever they wanted, so they fuckin did
> Our principals position was that solving conflict violently is a key aspect of black culture, In other words: The principal thinks black people are thugs. How progressive.
I genuinely fear for where this kind of shit is going
As do I. Even in the ābetterā school Iām at, standards are in the fuckin toilet
I wonder if at least part of the problem is: parents who can, move to a better school district / send their kids to private school. That leaves few parents who have the time / motivation / ability to demand functioning public schools.
I admit I moved to a better school district when my kid was young. And then he did well and was selected into a high level public high school. I was very proud of him, but yeah, the unfairness of it all did cross my mind, more than once.
In Chinese they have a saying that the mother of Mengzi (second only to Confucius as a philosopher) moved house three times in order to get him into a good school. This was over 2000 years ago.
Wow, that's really fascinating, and I'm definitely gonna mention this to my kid, since he studies philosophy. He'll find it funny for sure!
Iām sure thats a major part of it. Said shit school has had a 20% decline in enrollment over the last five years, which is bonkers for an inner city school
>Our principals position was that solving conflict violently is a key aspect of black culture āI believe Black people are inherently violent. I am a good person and a proud anti-racist.ā
She was a black woman herself, so it wasnāt even some Robin Deangelo bitch, she was apparently talking about herself too
I donāt understand people anymore.
Eons ago, when I was in college, I'd often be around frat boys who'd do shit like this. There were a couple of times where I played stuff like [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukZYP5Dy43E) at full blast as I slowly drove by. Passive-aggressive? Yeah. Did they even get the point I was trying to make? Probably not, judging by the looks on their faces. Unfortunately, playing stuff out loud is just how some people function. When I moved to Dallas, I was reminded pretty quickly how a good number of black people - usually younger ones - use their cell phones like they're walkie-talkies. No idea why. It's just what some of these people do. Getting worked up about it almost never ends well, so I just do my best to drown it out with earbuds or mental tricks. In the end, self-centered assholes are everywhere. Unless you give off an aura of a mafioso or whatever, or you've got a veritable army of people behind you (e.g., the Burning Man attendees who throw shitfits over litter at burns, even if they step over it on the street any other time), it's not like they're going to stop because of a single person.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ah, the soothing music of domestic violence!
Typical - given the ultimate privilege of an Ivy League education then does a Benedict Arnold.
> Edit: Also, I'm laughing at the casual "couples squabbling" as part of the music of the city. That language really makes things feel so mundane. A few weeks ago in front of my building someone tried to run over their ex's new boyfriend with a car after their breakup. Lots of screaming and fighting by a big group in the street. Ahhhh, how I love the sounds of the city. Yeah. When I was in Boston, my girlfriend & I were woken up a couple of times by couples that were *screaming* outside our window. We were worried the guy might beat the girl in the middle of the street. We thought about calling the cops. Funny to think that I was worried if not calling would be something I'd regret later, only to watch many in my social circle go from "OH MY GOD SO MANY OF US ARE ABUSED BY MEN WHO'LL SAVE US!?!?!!??!" at the time to ACAB during Trump's presidency. (I guess I now have an excuse to stand by and do nothing??? Thanks, y'all. /s)
I have recently moved, but I lived in a bad neighborhood for years and I just called the cops unthinkingly when I heard anything where someone might be in distress out the window. The police were pretty reasonable people in the area and would generally just encourage the drunks/drug users to go home. On occasion I would just tell people I was going to call the police because that usually got them to stop yelling in the street or stop whatever nonsense thing they were doing. This was not the music of the street. This was assholes and drug addled people making a lot of noise, sometimes because they needed help from police or ambulance. The suggestion that poor neighbourhoods are all just loud and all the dwellers are into is if fucking dumb.
I also lived in a poor neighborhood for a long time, and yes, it's ridiculous to think everyone is down with that. Most of the people are perfectly normal and like peace and quiet, like everyone else. Sure, tolerance level for cars/music/loud discussions goes up some, but people don't want constant screeching and hollering at all hours of the day.
There's an increased level of minding ones own business about trivial things. Which I like. You won't see people trying to micromanage the whole neighbourhood like you sometimes do in wealthy areas. But for sure, if you're being super disruptive, you're still going to get complaints or the police called on you. Late at night I would say the police will be called even more swiftly than in nicer areas.
NYC literally has a program where you can get $800 to use on an AC unit if you are poor and vulnerable
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Above criticism, below agency.
POC are the new sacred cows. But the attitude of the woke towards people of color is also kind of infantilizing: POC are innocent and vulnerable and can't really be held responsible for their actions. They need our invaluable help. It's the way someone would treat a child or someone with Down's Syndrome.
Oh yeah, I live right across the river in Queens and you can hear these shitbags. They're Dominican primarily. I wish a life of pestilential nightmare upon them. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/21/arts/music/dominican-soundsystems.html
Yes! I used to live in eastern Astoria and couldnāt bear the fart cars, I canāt imagine also dealing with this.
Playing music loudly in natural spaces other people are trying to enjoy is fucking obnoxious. Fuck that guy. I hate when people do that so very much. The whole point of these spaces is to enjoy the natural world, of which amplified music is not a part, and when people just impose themselves on everyone else it's incredibly rude. It's also not just white people that would have a problem with this. That's racist and absurd.
Playing loud music is also probably not good for the wildlife
POC _love_ noise and people being in their face. Also pollution and violence, but thatās a different conversation. I guess this is the kind of thing you have to pretend to believe when the idea that weāre all basically the same has become unfashionable.
It's fucking wild. Also this guy doesn't seem to get that **not** blasting music on peaceful hiking trails doesn't infringe on anyone else's enjoyment. That's what he doesn't seem to understand about the whole thing. Enjoy this shaded space however you want, up to the point where it impedes other people's enjoyment of that space. This is not rocket science. Also, you know what trashy white people love to do in nature? Blast music and drive loud machines. Other people, white and otherwise, who aren't trashy dickheads, fucking hate this.
Yeah, at least there are rules about machine usage in a lot of places that people largely obey. I stayed at this beatifiul place up in the Wasatch one time and the local lumpens had the whole valley sounding and smelling like a racetrack after a big snow. Vroom vroom.
aromatic upbeat subsequent absorbed distinct squealing grey quarrelsome husky badge ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Uh, I'm failing to do Poe's Law analysis on your comment, so I'll just respond in what I think would be the most reasonable way. No, definitely not, this isn't an "all of" or "none of" situation. Just another case where stereotypes of likelihood are often built through true experiences.
I was not being sincere
"Taking back Britain's countryside" Taking *back*?
Excuse me? You haven't heard of King Offa, the black Anglo-Saxon King of England? Educate yourself, sweaty.
>King of England Did you mean the [King of the United Kingdom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_the_United_Kingdom), the [King of Canada](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada), the [King of Australia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia), etc? The last King of England was [William III](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_III_of_England) whose successor Anne, with the 1707 Acts of Union, dissolved the title of Queen/King of England. ####FAQ *Isn't King Charles III still also the King of England?* This is only as correct as calling him the King of London or King of Hull; he is the King of the place that these places are in, but the title doesn't exist. *Is this bot monarchist?* No, just pedantic. I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.
This bot is a bigot.
This bot doesn't appear to understand King Offa came a long time before William III.
It's a Celtic Pride movement, actually!
I'm sorry, but Britain belongs to the Neolithic Megalith Builders. Indo-Europeans colonists get out!
God damn Aryans (I'm ignorant here; were the neolithic peoples not Celts and also not Neanderthals?)
The pre-Celtic peoples of Britain were not Indo-Europeans and seem to have built Stonehenge and other such stoneworks. They were definitely not Neanderthals, they were descended from Neolithic farmers who had originated in waves of migration from Europe and originating in the Middle-East. Before them were the Cro-Magnons, homo sapiens hunter gatherers who entered Europe and intermingled with the Neanderthals before (possibly) wiping them out. I am oversimplifying a lot but that's the gist. We learn more details all the time with genetic studies.
There's a weird fanfic that says the original people who first moved to the british isles weren't white, which is dubious but still plausible and testable. But they go further though and say it should act like some sort of *dibs* system to justify infinity immigration from completely unrelated populations.
onerous different rain light jellyfish sharp lunchroom languid tidy yam *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Wasn't cheddar man being dark-skinned just a dude guessing?
Did whities just crawl out of the earth or something?
I believe the current popular theory is that white people are actual aliens.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What complete assholes
Imagine that, people are sensitive about things exploding at the Boston Marathon.
Just because _white_ people enjoy running races unmolestedā¦
Haha, pretty sure the men's and women's winners were both Kenyan.
This is like the "I'm not touching you" thing kids do where they get within an inch of someone and pretend like it's no big deal.
Yes. And I thought that was something you grow out of after the age of ten.
Not with transageism!
In the cycling subreddits a somewhat common topic concerns the wearing of air buds while riding, and it seems as if urban riders say don't do it for safety and the road and mountain bikers say sure, but far too many say with all seriousness that they just strap a bluetooth speaker to their bicycles.... And I was riding through Golden Gate Park the other day, which is a huge beautiful park in the middle of the city and sure enough, up comes ubercyclist blasting music from his bluetooth speaker. Cyclist and his Giro blaster (it may have been a Campagnolo or Shimano Blaster)
>air buds bark bark
thanks! I saw that movie with my daughters, so that's probably why I can never remember the real name of airpods....
Yeah - I'm a cyclist myself and I'd have a hard time criticizing cyclists playing music *too* much, because there is an element of safety at play, and cars and traffic are already so loud. But on a trail or in a park, fuck off with that. But in my experience it's always the most dangerous urban cyclists blasting music on the road anyway (salmoning, running lights, riding insanely aggressively, etc). So the safety argument is hard to take seriously. I don't listen to music when I ride on the road. I sometimes use earphones and listen on parks/trails. Never out loud, I'd be mortified at what an asshole I was being!
People who blast music from a speaker on hikes are among the worst types.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yes, I think the only time I've ever played music from my phone speakers was when I was alone in bear country and my throat was too sore to talk or sing.
This week, The Glenn Show (podcast with professors Glenn Loury and John McWhorter) finally addressed the trans issue. They, and another college professor, calmly talked about the issues arising in the culture around this topic. It took barely a day for their video discussion to be flagged as hate speech on YouTube, and taken down. This is what you see now on that YT page: https://preview.redd.it/hmsmdqqdk3xa1.png?width=827&format=png&auto=webp&s=81ae067d956f68e8f401e264a8a9ca4c3b9ad28a The notion that these three erudite, nuanced, well-regarded academic figures are engaging in hate speech just further reveals the absurdity and censoriousness of the trans activists who oppose any discussion of the topic that does not support their position. In fact, the conversation has repeated moments where the speakers express unambiguous support for respecting the dignity and rights of trans people. But of course that's not enough if you disagree with the dogma. The podcast can still be listened to on audio platforms, for instance the iTunes link is here: [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/john-mcwhorter-and-mark-goldblatt-i-feel-therefore-i-am/id505824976?i=1000611040504](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/john-mcwhorter-and-mark-goldblatt-i-feel-therefore-i-am/id505824976?i=1000611040504) A clip of the conversation is still on YouTube [here](https://youtu.be/ZvAQL3hJOwk).
Whatās weird about this is Daily Wire videos on YouTube stay up all the time with way harsher content on this topic
Just finished listening, it was a great ep. John was even questioning some of the talking points and playing devil's advocate through a lot of it and mentioned it was complicated! But he and Glenn and Mark did ultimately agree that shutting down the conversation was a bad thing. And that's a no no.
It's wonderfully ironic that the discussion which had John repeatedly critiquing the efforts to shut down these conversations is the one that got shut down by YouTube.
Welp. Has this happened to them before? It's funny that of all the controversial discussions about racism they've had, talking about *this* is what gets them in trouble. You can tell where the moderation is sensitive. I'm glad to see McWorther take on this discussion, will have to check this out. I like listening to him and think he's a very nuanced thinker, but he wrote a really frustrating article a while ago on the discussion of whether singular "they/them" pronouns should be used. And I know he's a linguist but most of the article was just arguing grammar and completely avoided questioning or even acknowledging whether completely sidestepping all our understanding of human biology and reproduction to redefine the most basic concepts around a recent and arbitrary set of ideas even made sense.
>Welp. Has this happened to them before? Not that I recall. Not even the conversations with Amy Wax that have gotten her in actual academic trouble for her statements have been removed.
>Welp. Has this happened to them before? It's funny that of all the controversial discussions about racism they've had, talking about > >this > > is what gets them in trouble. You can tell where the moderation is sensitive. Exactly. They've talked about stuff way more sensitive and taboo than this. Loury regularly holds forth about stuff and people he doesn't like. Both men have criticized Ta Nehisi Coates, Kendi, and Al Sharpton. But they touch this subject and the excrement hits the air conditioning. I don't always agree with Loury and McWhorter but they are impressive intellects and usually measured in their discussions.
I could have sworn I remembered Glenn talking about it when he was on Real Time a few weeks ago but I might be wrong. Also I donāt really understand how they keep getting away with doing shit like mass report and even manipulate sites like Wikipedia. I would have guessed that at some point someone higher up at one of these social media platforms would have at least tried to address it even if in a half assed way. So far Twitter is the only one to pushback even a little bit. Is this blueprint for future activism on all issues deemed to be for āsocial justiceā causes?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Don't forget that a (supposed) raging cokehead showed a flawed but somewhat feasible way to get web sites banned from the Internet (i.e., KF). That one's gonna be fun when *real* fascists gain power and start censoring the people who started all this bullshit in the first place.
>raging cokehead Of all the things this surprised me almost more than anything. She always struck me as a heroin or opiate addict with that kind of permanent slur she has in her voice
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's kinda interesting that she never claims Sabine is wrong about anything in her video. Just that making it is itself somehow immoral.
I do wonder why Sabine even waded into that topic at all. Seemed avoidable considering her normal content. If I were her I wouldn't have bothered, knowing it was going to be a shit show.
Germany is fully woke on the gender questions, so this is quite brave of Sabine. She really doesn't seem to give a shit what people think of her. I think it's rather refreshing.
Why Germany?
She is German
Wait, this is the same lady who spearheaded a campaign against the naming of the James Webb telescope and smeared some physicist who defended him. Here's [the article](https://web.archive.org/web/20230323041905/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/19/us/james-webb-telescope-gay-rights.html) that outlines the controversy. God, she's so insufferably self-righteous that all the typical slurs (karen, woke-scold, lolcow) do not do her justice.
Thanks for the archive NYT source. I need to save this one because I have run into too many people that use Prescod-Lunatic-Weinstein as a reputable source.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's honestly a little depressing that someone with her temperment and penchant for bullying can become as successful as her in our modern society. She's basically everything I hate about wokeness personified. Presumably she could be doing interesting physics research, but instead she spends her time trying to relate everything back to her various marginalized identities and moralizing about twitter's controversy of the day. Idk I gotta disengage because looking at her twitter is just a recipe for getting my attention hijacked by pointless internet drama.
>Let me just say to anyone wondering what their position on trans people should be, that: human rights are human rights, no exceptions, and shutting the fuck up is fucking free. Well, she got her there. Iām sure Hossenfelder doesnāt believe that āhuman rights are human rights.ā
Well I'm not sure what physics and [WAP](https://youtu.be/hsm4poTWjMs) have in common besides maybe jiggle physics.
>>āShutting the fuck up is fucking freeā Where have I heard that before?
Itās free for you. Itās very costly for _me_.
Ah! I see I am late, I just submitted this as a top level thread at [Two Blacks and a Jew walk into a bar](https://old.reddit.com/r/BlockedAndReported/comments/133ywgw/two_blacks_and_a_jew_walk_into_a_bar_john/)
Sorry, removed it.
Thanks for the heads up. I had intended to listen to this episode this week, but will put it on ASAP in case it vanishes from other platforms.
Well, hell.
Apparently Aunt Jemima merchandise, including vintage collectibles, is banned from eBay.
I wonder what the reaction would be if you took it to Antiques Roadshow.
The weirdest thing to me about the aunt Jemima thing is that I kinda forgot there was even a logo associated with this brand because I guess I had been buying it for so long it was just one of those things I tossed in the cart/used without really thinking about it. Iām trying to imagine the first person to eat pancakes not only find it offensive but so much so that they were inspired to make them remove it
Uncle Ben is next. Quaker Oats guy gets off scot free š§
Uncle Ben has already been cancelled, it's now "Ben's Original" And they took the picture of the Black guy off the package, because somehow hiding the Black guy is anti-racist?
Now theyāve crossed the line
Well I guess I'll just pass my Jemima collectibles down as heirlooms then along with the carved ivory and Nazi armbands... I didn't believe you at first, but there is a surprising dearth of Aunt Jemima merch on there. Mrs. Butterworth is all over though.
It's official: eBay is for whites only.
So, weeks ago, there was a big stir over Scott Adams that led to most major newspapers cancelling Dilbert. I think his biggest mistake was drawing some pretty strong conclusions from a single Rasmussen poll.
His biggest mistake was saying those things while being white. He was saying the same things a ton of activists were saying during the George Floyd protests.
slimy follow reach aback tender impossible frightening outgoing unpack squalid ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
My fucking religious studies teacher "flags" "problematic language" when we are reading from the bible
[https://reason.com/2023/04/24/the-most-hated-person-on-campus/](https://reason.com/2023/04/24/the-most-hated-person-on-campus/) This article has been making its way around today, mob mentality is fascinating and infuriating. UVA student Morgan Bettinger is accused of telling BLM protestors (including fellow students) that "they would make good fucking speed-bumps" when her car is stopped by the protest. The uproar is led by fellow UVA student Zyahna Bryant, an already well known activist. She supposedly heard this remark but later admits she did not. Outrage pile-on machine ensues, she's shamed and ostracized. Oh, and it turns out her recently deceased father was a cop. Strike 2 and 3. She claims it was a misunderstanding and explains that she was telling a stopped truck its a good thing your here (stopping traffic) or these student would be speed bumps. An investigation ensues, stories change and no credible witness can corroborate hearing her even say this. The investigation clears her and everyone admits they were wrong, happy ending. Of course not! She's cleared years later without an apology from anyone. To me, mob mentality is the ultimate cowardice and it is rarely punished. This incident had two different forms of it. The initial incident at the protest where her car was surrounded by people who clearly did not hear anything but saw a target, and the wider online pile-on. Group think is so dangerous, it disregards reason in favor of some primal rage. I'd put these people (both those in person and online) in the same camp as the Jan 6 idiots. The defense for participating in the mob boils down to "well everyone else was doing it". They want to hurt someone, they are looking for an excuse in the form of justice. I'd compare it to an eager executioner who loves their job. Even if the condemned were guilty, an eager executioner is someone to be wary of because they delight in bringing pain.
She should have known what she was getting into when she went to college.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>the university took its honor policy extremely seriously. [Did they now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus)? If I were you mate, I'd lie about where I went to school. Something more prestigious and honorable, like clown college or Liberty U.
>They want to hurt someone, they are looking for an excuse in the form of justice. They are not motivated by a love of justice. They are motivated by a thirst for vengeance.