Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Try a legitimate argument (Score 1) 331

One other thing:

I have simply NEVER heard a right-winger tell anybody "Don't watch MSNBC!" or "Don't read Slate!" etc. Right wingers usually just roll their eyes over left-wing sources (which they DO read and watch).

Funny, because I have heard right-wingers say things like "Rachel Maddow shouldn't be on TV", etc. To believe that one political side is squeaky clean while the other is totally corrupt is simply ludicrous.

Comment Re:Try a legitimate argument (Score 1) 331

Notice that I said nothing about her gender. I try not to do that.

You just need to look at her Wikipedia page to see the laundry list of controversies she has been involved in.

A particularly egregious example that jumped out at me was her "In Defense of Internment: The Case for 'Racial Profiling' in World War II and the War on Terror" book where she was justifying the internment of over 100,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II (but yet German-Americans were not subject to the same internment). To quote from Wikipedia, "The book's message has been condemned by Japanese American groups and civil rights advocates. Its scholarship has been criticized by academics."

I see her as being a biased source, easily dismissed by many. That's why I believe that we would be better served in the H1-B debate with someone whose position is not so stridently well-known.

Comment Re:Sorry, but no. (Score 1) 331

Hilariously, I got called a member of the KKK/misogynist and also someone who gets all their news from Daily Kos in response to the same posting.

1) I couldn't care less what race/gender Malkin is. She has simply been demonstrably wrong time and time again (for example, the Jamil Hussein controversy, where Malkin claimed without evidence that this person, who the AP was using as the source for several stories in Irag, simply did not exist) and some of here demagoguery has put people in real physical danger.

2) She has been a contributor to VDARE, a site that uses a lot of white supremacist rhetoric and supports descredited ideas, like that there is scientific evidence that supports idea that some races are mentally inferior to others.

Comment Re:More feminist bullshit (Score 1) 728

They problem may very well be sociopaths, but the victims tend to be women who step outside of their traditional roles.

The there are the stalking murders of Rebecca Schaeffer and Mia Zapata plus what happened with Sarah MacLachlan, so to pretend that it's simply "sociopaths" is a gross over-simplification.

Comment Re:WHY are men trying to scare women away from gam (Score 2) 728

When there were only a few "geeky girls" around, they were a novelty, and there weren't enough of them to affect change in the workplace. I remember those days. We had lots of highly sexist/racist terms people would just throw around without thinking. Look up "BCH, RCH, and GCH" and the mnemonic for remembering resistor color that begins "Black boys" for example (I won't repeat them). Cheesecake calendars and centerfolds were also displayed prominently at desks. And the women there had to tolerate it. They had no choice if they wanted to stay.

But starting in the early 90's, women starting getting enough power to force companies to enact sexual harassment policies. The calendars disappeared and some topics of conversation became forbidden at work. And many men resented this.

So the trolls learned from this, and thus any woman who starts to be listened to in other male-dominated areas must be destroyed as soon as possible. This is what Kathy Sierra said in her posting. Because, by default, they are not deserving of the attention.

It's the same dynamic that has kept Rush Limbaugh on the radio for 30 years.

Comment Re:Don't over generalize (Score 1) 728

Wow. This is the first time I've seen "meta victim blaming" where you are blaming the people who call out statements like "Don't wear a short skirt if you don't want to get raped." as "victim blaming."

Is it at all possible in your world to blame the predators?

Comment Re:Emma Watson is full of it (Score 0) 590

"People should be free to do what they want" is one of the stupidest beliefs in the world. Actions have consequences, and the thing that I "want* to do may be injurious to other people of even to humanity as a whole.

This is why I believe the libertarians typically go too far, especially how they refuse to take responsibility for how their actions adversely harm others, but I also don't want to be under the authoritarian heel either. So it's a balance.

Also, your use of "feminazi" really gives away the game about your true feelings on this issue. You don't really believe that feminists have any real political power, do you?

Comment Re:Gun nuts (Score 1) 1374

Stoking fear? Right. One of the biggest fears is that the government will outlaw guns. Far-fetched, right? Tell you what. Hop in your time machine to five years ago. Go to Chicago and try to legally buy a gun. Guess what? For the average person five years ago, legally buying a gun was practically impossible. IT is not paranoia if they really ARE out to get you.

Thank you for proving my argument about the gun-proponents stoking fear. They've certainly got you in a tizzy.

As to the NRA quote, is there anything unfactual out there? Yes, we live in a very safe country. The odds of any bad violence happening to any one person out there is relatively small (of course, this varies GREATLY by zip code). But dangers are out there. How much danger is enough for you to carry a gun? Only YOU can decide that. However, it is up to you, and should not be up to a politician to tell you "no." Simply stated, if something bad DOES happen to you, how long would it take for you to call 911 and expect help to arrive? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? Would that be fast enough?

You need some lessons on how to evaluate risk. The gun-proponents are big on the fallacy of "misleading vividness", and use this to stoke fear. It would be nice to have unbiased research, but thanks to Congress banning the CDC from researching gun violence in the mid-90s, we have no actual data.

For the record, I own guns (where I live, it would probably take 20 minutes for a sheriff to show up), but I do not carry one when I am away from home. But I have friends who do, and I respect their decision.

I personally would not want to be out with anyone who feels the need to carry a gun, because I don't know what might trigger this person to draw the weapon, and who knows who might eventually get shot. We are all human. We all make mistakes.

Slashdot Top Deals

Moneyliness is next to Godliness. -- Andries van Dam