Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:book bans are bad durr (Score 1) 250

âoeAll Boys Arenâ(TM)t Blueâ is a young-adult nonfiction book that details the life of George Johnson growing up as a queer Black man. This is a book with explicit passages about fisting, butt plugs, anal, the spit-or-swallow decision and rape as well as 10yr olds performing sodomy, underage incest, strap-on dildo, and blow jobs.

"Gender Queer" has illustrations of fellating a dildo, as well as the MC getting aroused by illustrations of an adult man touching the penis of a young boy.

"Beyond Magenta" has reference to a six year old boy blowing older boys.

"Flamer" has a bunch of tweens talking about the last person to jizz in a bottle has to drink it all,

"This Book is Gay" gives step by step instructions on how to give a handjob.

Is this OK for kids? Those are graphic sex? This book is gay is, afaik LITERALLY MEANT AS A GRAPHIC GUIDE TO GAY SEX, no?

If parents are forcibly removed from School Board meetings on grounds of indecency, for reading text from books their kids brought home from the school library, that's pretty wrong.

If you say that's ok, you're a kook and/or a pedo.

Comment Re:Well, well, quite a surprise... (Score 1) 199

Would I rather live in a regressive petro state with a medieval patriarchy enforced by law where women are little more than chattel slavery and legally regarded as less than a toddler boy? No. I like women as people equal to me in every respect, thanks. That said, I'm also not really fond of 'corrective' sexism where women are a 'favored victim class' long past the point of equality; it's been pretty solid for years that more girls go to college than boys - have the preferential admissions ceased? No? Why?

That said, I think it's delusional to not recognize that men and women approach things differently. Not better or worse, generally, just differently. In 2024, we've all been deeply programmed to never question some things, so it's anathemic if not outright heretical to point out that women:
- tend to care about the rights and feelings of others as well as their own
- tend to be accomodative
- tend to seek group consensus and approval
- tend to be risk avoiding and stability seeking, ....and the inculcation of these approaches as priorities are not necessarily completely positive for larger issues in our democracy nor (especially) in geopolitics.

It's 2024, I expect that if you've read this far (and depending on your age) you'll be reacting in shock and no small anger to these generalizations but they ARE largely proved.
https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwe...
As a VERY broad assertion, I'd state that those feminine qualities undercut democracy by trading things I value like liberty and choice, for things are are less important like comfort and stability.

Hell, I saw a recent study that testosterone actually leads to positive feelings when rejecting authority.

I think women are generally more easily emotionally manipulated. "Look at all the sad little families just trying to cross the border. Look at all the poor children in Gaza."
(Men were too, for sure, but the effeminization of the electorate has led to the deprecation of patriotism generally, so ironically this has left men LESS easily manipulated by that historically very-strong lever on them. Skinny-jeans wearing soyboys aren't going to take to the streets if someone waves a US flag. Well, maybe to protest against it, lol.)

In the same generalization, men can also be TOO uncaring, TOO disruptive, TOO independent of necessary consensus, of course. I just think we've swung way past any sort of rational center today.

Comment book bans are bad durr (Score 1) 250

Yes, stifling intellectual expression is in principle a bad thing.

Otoh, to suggest that all printed matter is sacrosanct is stupid.

What the screeching here fails to note is that a vast array of the books banned are things like graphic sex manuals being pushed into elementary school libraries for, let's be honest, political or sexual goals, neither of which are admirable.

  No reasonable person believes a kindergartener should learn to read by reading the captions to "a guide to Asian anal hardcore" or "how best to suck a co co".

To be clear, I do NOT believe such things should be banned. I personally think they're valueless, but that's irrelevant.

To suggest however that children should be provided unfettered access to them is ridiculous and if you believe that, you're a kook or a pedo.

Comment right (Score 1) 113

Waves of people invade shops, take things freely, and if anyone interferes, THEY get arrested.
Otherwise, nobody gets arrested, and if they are, they're let go immediately without bail and if they fail to show up for their hearing, well, nobody cares.

Yes, of course, knowing their *faces* is the solution.

Anyway, we all know that this will be discontinued anyway when the pictures turn out to be disproportionally "racist".

Comment Nah (Score 4, Insightful) 56

In my meager experience, most actual work is NOT appropriately delivered or communicated in video - it's far too linear, unsearchable, not amenable to note-taking, monologue, and ultimately relies on presenter charisma, beauty, and professional voice and presentation talent - something that's in vastly shorter supply than most people believe.

I hate to imagine what Tufte's opinion of this would be. Buy them, read them, absorb them: https://www.edwardtufte.com/tu...

Comment Let's be honest, x2 (Score 1) 102

1) the teachers that would be fine with this are probably phoning that shit in anyway; would we REALLY expect such a teacher - when told they can't use AI - to scrupulously follow the instructions and laboriously/ethically go through the papers carefully themselves instead?

2) re point 1, let's maybe revisit that whole 'tenure' bullshit and avoidance of merit pay raises/not-raises for teachers in general as some sacrosanct profession? I know if I hand a chunk of my job to a machine, I need to understand that I'm likely training my replacement.

Comment In short (Score 1) 231

....they're a canary in the coal mine for ALL American manufacturing businesses I'm acquainted with.

I've been in industrial logistics for coming up on 35 years now and this is 100% the example of pretty much every AA or AAA company I've dealt with, including corporate elements of my own firm. Boeing maybe was slightly more aggressive (or the results of their shitty, short term strategies are unfortunately vastly more consequential and obvious).

Would love to see some sort of contract clause for senior management up to c-suite that meant that departing the company doesn't exonerate you from the results of your choices, and that the giant, fat payouts are conditional on, dunno, 10 years exposure to clawback for incompetence or liability.

That'll never happen though, because the ones exposed to it would be the ones who would have to implement it.

Comment Re:Radical idea (Score 1) 82

"I don't like the things their statistics prove, so I'm going to declare them a FOUNTAIN OF DISINFORMATION."

thestreet.com has whole sections on crypto and cannabis. Very credible source!
Yes, of COURSE the statistics show "statutory tax rates", how else are we going to compare region vs region?
Oh noes, some US companies paid nothing? it's the same in the Euro tax regime

Amazon: $44bn sales, $0 taxes paid.
https://www.theguardian.com/te...

Ikea? https://tehcpa.net/tax-plannin...

You want to pay more taxes? Please, be my guest. You are fully able to pay more than your minimum share. I think you should.

I don't give the faintest shit that there are crazy-wealthy people out there. My life isn't fired by envy.

Comment Re:Radical idea (Score 1) 82

What?
" I have paid nowhere near that in taxes over my entire life. "
I mean, that's a staggering statement - either you're being disingenuous or haven't the faintest idea where government revenue comes from.
You know it's not just you, yes?
There are about 160 MILLION other people paying income taxes....that's about $2.3 trillion or about $15k per person average per year (this is FEDERAL taxes of course, not including state).

"meager amount of cash they get from fucking with us barely covers the costs of fucking with us"
Um, wut? You don't actually believe this do you?

Literally, this is 2 seconds on google:
https://www.taxpolicycenter.or...
54% of US govt revenue comes from INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX.
9% from corporate income tax
30% from additional payroll tax (FICA - ultimately, another personal tax, really since it comes out of YOUR pay)
2% from excise taxes (Taxes on purchases of goods and services, mostly from gasoline, cigarettes, alcoholic beverages, and airline travel)
5% other (customs duties, estate taxes, other earnings) -- hilariously, before ww1 this funded the ENTIRE FEDERAL BUDGET.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Users know your home telephone number.

Working...