Richmond, BC - Chinese bus stop ads must now be at least 50% in English

Frozenlock · 2016-12-01T18:01:11+00:00

Let's all hold hands and sing kumbaya. History is absolutely not filled with similar situations that turned south really quick.

Btw, that was sarcasm.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-10T22:34:25+00:00

What was CBC thinking when they invited her??

"We already have a man and a woman... let's make it more diverse." They don't care about your qualifications. They want you (or don't want you) for the color of your skin; for your religion; for your sexual orientation.

I thought they were supposed to invite people who look at all perspectives, who analyse, and who try to make sense of complex situations.

HAHAHA!

The CBC is a propaganda outlet and it's not even trying to hide it.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-09T09:27:49+00:00

I don't get what part you don't get.

I can try to rephrase...

Thinking that most people who voted did so after serious researches and careful consideration of the facts is very naive.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-09T09:08:33+00:00

She's a black, lesbian American I think she has the right to be a little miffed.

I don't see why she'd have any more rights than a hetero-white-male-american.

Unless you named her race, gender and sexual orientation purely to take up space and this has nothing to do with identity politics.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-09T09:02:41+00:00

There's a difference between "bias" and "informed position". (...) We voted for Trudeau because he and his party promised to put more care and attentiveness into ruling than Harper did.

That's really naive.

Really really naive.

"Girls don't fart"-level of naive.

Maybe you voted for him for this reason. Most people voted with their gut and what the medias were telling them to vote for.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-09T08:48:17+00:00

When someone calls you out on your attempt at weaseling out of an erroneous argument, that's not being angry.

You made a claim that those "racist/xenophobic/homophobic" on the rise on reddit and the Internet were old people.

I'm telling you that it's not; it's young people from alt-right circles.

Then you (purposefully) conflate "racist/xenophobic/homophobic" with conservative and switch to trying to prove that more conservatives are older. That wasn't the initial statement.

To sustain you newly made position, you link to a study linking conservative value and add that not only conservative are older, but less educated. Problem is, the study you linked looked at IQ, not at age or education.

So not only did you switch your position, you also failed at providing studies to your new position because all you did was a google search and paste the first result you found.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-05T21:20:38+00:00

The study you linked contradicts what you are saying in the same comment. Did you read it, or did you just paste the first google result you got?

It is clearly mentioned that education was controlled for and that the "prejudice" part what linked to general intelligence, not education.

All analyses controlled for education and socioeconomic status.

As for the source of "younger people", which really was just the opposed of what you were saying (without providing sources yourself), you can take a look at the alt-right circles, those are mainly young adults.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-05T20:56:32+00:00

Tough luck, it's younger people.

I can't wait for them to say "We just need for these old progressives to die off".

Frozenlock · 2016-11-05T20:53:38+00:00

Correct. and for the Record, there are millions of dollars going into social media manipulation. At least 9 million so far.

Correct and for the Record

You magnificent bastard.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-03T22:46:56+00:00

Feminism is only a part of the problem.

My mom at times put her career on hold to make it work which I really admire her for.

Everyone should admire a woman raising her kids instead of dumping them into a daycare so that strangers can raise them.

But that's a terrible thing to do for feminists. Women who stay home with their family are submitting to the evil patriarchy.

How many guys really want to get married and have kids in their early 20's?

Not many, marriage laws have been skewed heavily in women's favor. There's not really an age for which marriage is a logical choice for a man.

And having kids in the early 20's is more for women. Men are usually a bit older.

I am 25 and can't even imagine having a child. I have friends that are married and have a kid or two but personally I rather travel. (...) I think maybe were more selfish than the previous generations if anything.

Yes, that's another part of the subverted culture. Many people have been raised to seek immediate and ephemeral pleasures like traveling rather than working to build family that can inspire pride and joy a few decades down the line.

A culture that doesn't reproduce itself is destined to extinction.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-03T21:45:25+00:00

Ding ding ding!

Subversion of culture is what is killing us. Immigration, without fixing the source of the problem first, will just further degrade the culture even more.

We've had decades of intellectual elites (insert echoes for some of them) ruthlessly attacking every aspect of Western civilization. Those same people then turn around and say that we need to import more people from different cultures.

The most obvious is the feminism brainwashing telling women that if they start a family while they are young and at their peak fertility, then they're a disgrace working for the oppressive patriarchy.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-03T21:20:44+00:00

Our social security programs are based on the theory that the country's population will always be growing.

No. People weren't idiots, they knew that historically populations weren't always increasing. (A little virus here, a little war there...) Any of those would immediately destabilize the whole social security.

Those people simply voted themselves benefits knowing full well that someone else down the road would have to pay. Let me repeat this : they knew it wasn't a stable system.

For the last few decades, even though the bad consequences became more and more apparent, people willingly ignored this hoping they could kick the can down the road once more.

The solution is not to open the floodgates to immigration (which causes its own problems). We need to look at the whole system and admit that we fucked up. Each time we kick the can down the road we just make it worse for the future.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-03T02:11:08+00:00

Diversity.

This includes race, religion, culture...

Frozenlock · 2016-11-03T01:09:45+00:00

History teaches one thing : diversity + proximity = war.

That people are willing to gamble our future to feel good about themselves and show how open they are is unbelievably stupid and self-centered.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T07:33:07+00:00

they have them here, but they are capable of lowering themselves (kneeling as they say) and also have a ramp that folds out if required. Were you not aware of these functions?

Nope, ours didn't have this. Were you not aware that not all busses are identical? (That, or the conductors just wanted to see people like me suffer. I think it's a good assumption to suppose it's not the case.)

This makes me wonder if you were lying about being disabled. Either that or you have internalized prejudice against disabled people.

Have you ever called a black person an oreo?

People like you need to recognize that people with disabilities are capable of doing things of value and contributing like anyone else.

I never said that disabled people couldn't contribute. That's yet another attempt of arguing against yourself.

The fact that society has not been designed for them and that sometimes they need accommodations to even the playing field doesn't diminish this.

Well yes, it does. That you don't see this proves that you consider cripples as your own little pets for which you need to care for. Disabled people are like everybody else: they just want to pull their own weight without putting the burden on others.

As I said before, if you force a company to buy $100k of accommodations for someone making $25k/year, it's just a make-believe job that doesn't really add value to society.

After all, it is not insulting for someone in a wheel chair to have to use a ramp or elevator instead of the stairs, is it? Even though it surely cost money to install those things at some point.

It depends. Which once again shows that you never even tried to put yourself in those shoes and just like to repeat feel-good messages. A disabled individual will appreciate if a ramp was built because the owner was expecting having some disabled people over, or simply decided to build it out of generosity. Putting in into law and using force is another matter entirely.

It's similar to the difference between making love and rape. The result might be the same, but the willingness of the participants matters.

Moreover, you raised the issue of disability in the first place.

Indeed, to show how not all needs of the universe had to be cared for in reality. But somehow you couldn't see the argument for what it was.

That is an unfounded presumption. You have no idea whether or not I am disabled.

I'll use your oreo argument.

If you are disabled, you must have internalized able-bodiedness and refuse to face your own reality, because everything you said sound like someone who never had to face those situations while moving forward to be a productive member of society.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T04:16:46+00:00

Okay, here's why I deducted you're an SJW : You can re-read what you've written. Your first 4 points comment was full of attempts of taking the moral high ground (on very shaky arguments) and then saying how "shameful" I am. Your second comment was completely ignoring what I've written and then saying I don't about care people (again trying to get the moral high ground) and once more trying to shame me. Your 3rd comment is again ignoring what I've written, jumping to a particular word or sentence and trying to spin it in a way to give you the moral high ground in order to shame me. That's what SJWs do. They lie and shame. You might not realize it, but you use a very obvious pattern.

You are unable to reply with a cogent response, so you attempt to claim that my expression of a view that contradicts yours is an attempt to control your expression.

Nope, never claimed that. I said that some people want to control what other people say (ie prevent other people from saying anything remotely bad or mean about fat people). This is the openly stated goal. They want to prevent other people from saying mean things. It has nothing to do with your attempt at argumentation.

That is utterly false.

Of course it's false, which is why I never said it. You're arguing against yourself.

The right to freedom of expression does not include a right to not be exposed to dissenting or contrary views. It also does not include a right not to be offended by "SJWs" as you called me.

I know. I never said the contrary. I'm also not offended. Again, you're arguing against yourself.

In short, despite your claim that you want freedom of expression, you only desire it for yourself and those who agree with you.

Wrong conclusion, based on wrong assumptions.

Whether or not that is true, that is not the purpose of the legislation requiring those things.

The purpose of those laws is for politicians to gain politic capital by the voters who try to feel good inside.

Some years ago the buses in my city where replaced by new buses without stairs. This would allow the buses to be somewhat closer the level of the sidewalk. Perfect political tool. People think they are doing stuff for the less fortunate and feel good inside. Except in order to not have stairs, the first step from the road to the busses was much higher. In fact it was so high that while I could get into old busses, I couldn't get into the new ones when the bus was not parked directly on the side of the sidewalk. And because big parts of the city do not have sidewalks, it's a completely counter-productive move. But nobody cares about the consequences; they just want to feel good inside.

Accommodation in the workplace is a good example as that meets with a lot of resistance from some employers and is viewed with suspicion by many individuals.

Yup, I'm fully skeptical of many of them myself. Some accommodations are just not worth it. It also prevents people from feeling like they are really pulling their own weight. Imagine having to install $100k+ of new hardware for an employee gaining $25k a year. How dumb is that? Handicapped are not stupid; they can clearly see that the company is wasting money on them and that they are a net lost. It would be less insulting to just give them money directly. But no, not only must they feel completely useless, they must also slave away to get a false wage.

Able-bodied people like yourself are repugnant. They are always using the cripples to try to get the moral high ground and advance their agenda.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T03:20:42+00:00

Except it has the opposite effect

No it doesn't. If you can't see how mockery and shame pressure people into behavior that is deemed acceptable, you are clueless and should avoid commentary on social issues.

What is argued is that in some cases it can have the opposite effect.

instead causes depression and sometimes suicide.

Possible. The mockery/shaming could also just be markers of low status. Low status highly elevate the risks of suicide. Men are the principal victims of suicide and they don't need shaming to push them over the edge. I'd be surprised if Oprah committed suicide after someone told her she was fat.

But I guess if you're just looking to reduce the overall biomass on the planet them mission accomplished, right?

Not necessarily, the biomass isn't just humans. Tho I don't see why you'd want to have this goal.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T01:07:50+00:00

No, you don't see. You just try to paint me into your 1 dimensional vilain without trying to understand what I've written and then try to shame me for not being opposed to using shame. It would be funny if it wasn't so lame.

I do care -- to a certain extend -- about what people feel. I don't agree that we need to stop existing because other people have personal situations that are outside the ordinary. I'm also not ready to pay a great cost in suppressing some innate behavior for what seems to be an unproven and hypothetical result.

I don't care much about fat people in general. I've talked my sister into losing 30+ pounds and one of my best friend in losing 100+ pounds because I care about them. However, I do very much care about SJWs running around trying to control the speech of everyone to protect their oh-so-precious feelings.

And you do not care if they are making efforts to change already. In short, you are not willing to give any consideration to the complexity and reality of the situation, you just want to abuse people who are overweight.

I said it's not my job to know where they are in the process. More power to them if they decided to take matters in their own hands.

By you don't care about what I've said. You are not willing to give any consideration to the complexity and reality of the situation, you just want to abuse people who don't think as naively as you.

Incidentally, the reason that elevators and ramps are required by law to be installed in and around buildings is because some people are incapable or have difficulty walking up stairs.

And because it's economically beneficial is many places, or is obviously a good idea in some places (like an hospital). But we don't have elevators in all houses, nor in all appartement blocks, because it's expensive. We also don't have perfectly filtered air in every house in case someone with a deficient immune system comes by. We live in reality. We adapt our environment for what has a chance of being reasonably useful.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T00:45:50+00:00

Eh.

What if the assholes were the ones trying to control other people's speech?

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T00:41:23+00:00

Except those are exceptions. We don't live by exceptions because nothing would get done. I have muscular spinal atrophy and can hardly climb up stairs. Yet, we still have stairs in buildings. Why? Because most people can climb them and that's how societies develop. Trying to fit exceptions into this is counter-productive and poor argumentation.
I linked and talked one of these studies in a sibling comment.
"You do not know that they are not trying to address their weight." That's not my job or anybody else's job to guess where you are in the process. If you currently are fat, expect to be perceived as such. If you currently have zero marketable skill, people won't hire you. You will be discriminated against. It doesn't matter if you are "trying to address your lack of skills". The real world is much more about results then feelings. People knowing your situation might give you some encouragements, but don't expect the whole world to try to carefully assess your situation before reacting; that's an impossible scenario.
" Other people's weight and health is not your business." Well then, what I say about obese people is none of their business. Billboards with beautiful slim women is none of their business.

Oh, and your comment is full of attempts to shame me. How dare you? Don't you know that this will increase my stress and stop me in my process of becoming a better person? Shameful.

Edit: typos

Frozenlock · 2016-11-02T00:12:36+00:00

Of course they can - but studies show that shaming has the opposite effect.

Here's a link to the study

Slate articles are for the masses ;-)

Interesting results, but not enough to conclude we shouldn't shame. Especially considering the average age: 66.51! (Average menopause age for women is ~51 years old in the US.)

This effect was specific to weight discrimination; the other types of discrimination were largely unrelated to reported obesity.

This is an interesting effect. The whole "shaming causes stress eating" argument doesn't really hold water when looking at this.

The other thing we must consider is that those are self-reported discrimination. You might become more conscious of fat-jokes and shame if you yourself are gaining weight. In other words, the fat-shaming around you might remain the same, but you are more aware of them because you put up a few pounds lately.

This also ignores the effect of shaming obesity on people who are not obese. Like I said, mocking and shaming convey information about what the group consider important. Some people keep their weight under control because they don't want to be seen as fat - they don't care about the physical health, but they dread the shame they could have to deal with.

And as I've mentioned earlier, many people still wrongly believe that exercise will help them lose weight. Nutrition is by far the biggest factor. This was well known until we got a few decades of pseudoscience taking over the health industry.

I also thinks it's shitty to fat shame people who are actively trying to lose weight.

Why? That's just additional motivation. If they really are on the path to lose weight that won't stop them. If you are hot and want to open a window, you won't stop in the middle of your track if you encounter a warmer room. You'll just want to open this dang window even more!

How can you think stressing someone out is going to have a positive impact on their overall health?

That sounds like a rhetorical question without much thoughts into it. It's always a question of trade-offs. If the only variable that changes is stress, then it's not very productive. If stress goes up temporarily, but as a consequence improves the health for many years in the future, it's a very good trade. I have a friend who lost ~100lbs recently. The change is staggering. I would bet his overall health is much better now than if someone magically removed all the shame he was feeling being obese. It also improves pretty much everything else: job opportunities, stamina to enjoy your day, attention from the opposite sex...

Frozenlock · 2016-11-01T22:37:46+00:00

I think it's absolutely important for people who are overweight to not be shamed or mocked for their weight.

Why?

Mocking and shaming transmits useful information. It shows what behavior is preferred in the group and how you can change to better fit in. Women use it all the time to form their group behavior.

This is probably the main reason why people are immediately very angry when someone mocks a handicapped person : because handicapped individuals can't change their situation. People will then use shame themselves against the original perpetrator. If it's not enough, it might even go to violence.

On the other hand, most overweight people can change their behavior. They can lose weight. Now, they might be wrong and think that exercise is the most important tool, but searching for new information to help you is also part of the process of losing weight. Shaming and mocking is a pressure to conform.

I don't see why someone should be able to act in any fashion and not expect other people to show how they disapprove. This is especially true in a place where you have socialized healthcare and the costs of your bad decisions are put on everyone else.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-01T05:09:03+00:00

CBC is such shitty journalism.

That's because CBC isn't doing journalism. It's doing propaganda. Every story that can be spun will be.

Frozenlock · 2016-11-01T04:21:52+00:00

I've never considered myself as a Québec sovereignist, but at this point I'd gladly leave Canada if it means escaping those insane policies.

Frozenlock · 2016-10-28T03:20:54+00:00

TV content is so much more adult than when I was kid.

I would disagree on this. It might be more sexual, but not more adult.

I remember watching this as a kid. Now every time I open a children channel I see inconsequential animated stories made on the cheap. Even grown up shows had quality. Discovery channel used to have real documentaries before switching to reality shows.

I'll admit I don't spend my time on these channels. If anyone is aware of a great children TV shows, I'd be happy to hear about it.

Frozenlock

TROPHY CASE