Jump to content

Willfully Horn

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    4576
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Willfully Horn

  1. 3 hours ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

    Godwin Law yo!

    He's not Hitler.  Let's talk about where Max B. (Jewish BTW) is wrong about Israel. 

    Since you invoked Godwin, please consider his thoughts, as he expressed in a WAPO editorial, which is found at the link. Here’s an excerpt:

    Godwin’s Law has also functioned, to quash appropriatecomparisons of today’s horrors to the 1930s and 1940s? I continue to insist that Godwin’s Law should never be read as a conversation-ender or as a prohibition on Hitler comparisons. Instead, I still hope it serves to steer conversations into more thoughtful, historically informed places.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/12/20/godwins-law-trump-hitler-comparisons/

  2. 6 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

    I do not agree with your accuracy aspect regarding the Tribune, BBC, AP or NPR. It's not that I think they frequently report inaccurate information, rather they certainly have a bias regarding WHAT information they choose to report.

    Didn’t I already say the same thing in my post you quote?

    6 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

    They are also all much more op-ed rather than fact based reporting. I personally don't need someone telling me how to view what occurred. 

     

    Each of the second tier outlets has a left-center bias, so I see from where you are coming. News, however, doesn’t happen in a vacuum, and explaining  the context of news is, to me, an important part of journalism.  Knowing their bias is on me. Which led me to mbfc, which, you will find, says what you say about op-ed.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 10 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

    "Real" journalists suck as much or more.  They are nothing more than propagandists.

    Is this true? Because it sounds like rhetoric. No doubt, there are propagandists masquerading as journalists, but, absent proof, I would think there are upstanding souls fighting the good fight. Any reason I should believe you?

    • Hook 'Em 2
  4. 17 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

    You are apparently on some list. I’d buy security cameras ASAP.

    I’ve been on that list since I called the FBI and told them they were fools for not releasing the unabomber’s manifesto. They’re just pissed I was right.

  5. On 4/27/2024 at 10:06 AM, C-Man said:

     

     

    18 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

     

     

     

     

    18 hours ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

     

     

    17 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

     

     

     

    None of these links load an image for me. But, I don’t have a twitter account. Nevertheless, links usually load. Has their policy changes? Do they load for anyone else?

  6. 4 hours ago, troph said:

    I’m honestly not sure what you’re trying to communicate about her? Might you further explain? 

    Apologies for the delay in responding. I have spent not a little bit of time trying to find the interview I heard, or an article that mentions that interview. In the process, I have learned she has made other controversial remarks, and they dominate search results.

    My memory is that, when she was discussing participating in Dancing with the Stars, she was nonplussed about folks being surprised she was being paired with a male dance partner. She went on to say that she is gay because she fell in love with a woman. I remember her stating she thought it possible that she might have fallen in love with a man, but that never happened, because she had already fallen in love with a woman.

    One quote of hers I did find sort of explains her thinking about sexuality:

    "People (the straight ones) often ask: Why are people gay? I say, well, why are people straight? There is no straight answer here, so to speak. Human sexuality is multi-faceted, complex and quite fluid; genes play a part as well. How much? Who knows? But that's not really the point anyway."

     

    The interview mentioned that she upset people who felt she was saying being gay is a choice. Which I thought was an unfair characterization of her words.  She did say folks who are certain that sexuality is a choice might have had feelings for both genders, and then made a choice about which gender they will love. 
     

    She fell in love with a person, not a gender. 
     

    https://www.advocate.com/news/daily-news/2012/01/27/martina-asks-whether-margaret-court-suppressing-her-own-lesbianism

    • Hook 'Em 1
  7. 24 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

    The reason I say governments are like organized crime, and therefore not legitimate is because for the bulk of human history we lived without borders, without government.  Sometimes there were cheiftons, but rarely did the cheiftons have any real power outside their immediate presense...and often without enforcement capabilities.  The worst that could happen to you is be banished by the tribe.  But aside from mating purposes that really didn't mean much since you were already hunting/gathering food anyway.

    But then schizmogenesis started to take hold and people started forming clans.  Then came warrior clans who started decimating other clans, and so on and so on...

    Mind you this was happening at different times in different places, but fast-forward and it lead to where we are today where people are compelled by force to obey.  Don't think you should be responsible for paying for a billionaire's new sports stadium?  Too bad, give us money or go to jail.  Wanna smoke a plant? Nope...we don't like that...have fun in prison.

     

    I can concede that point.  It's not my business.  And I would never vote against it...I just personally disagree.  And I think that's how it should be.  For example, I'm firmly pro-choice.  And in the same spirit, I would have zero problem with someone who is personally pro-life, as long as they don't force me to abide by their beliefs.  I'm against it...doesn't mean I don't think others can be for it.  Full disclosure, I have a very close friend who's trans.  But she transitioned later in life.

    I was going to ask what you meant, but I think "it" was meant be "UT"....yes, that pic is 100% UT.  You can tell by the building in the background...and maybe the Academy Sports logo.

    Thanks. No argument, but also, agree to have a different opinion.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  8. 52 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

    Always happy to indulge in honest debate.

    Regarding trans, I don't think the doctors know much more than the rest of us at this point.  To be clear, I'm not anti-vax or anti-doc...I simply believe not enough study has been done.  Let's not forget the medical community also endorsed smoking, cocaine, heroin, lobotomies, etc., so forgive me for being a bit skeptical until the science progresses.

    As for immigration, I'm against mass immigration regardless of reason.  This is one of my seemingly paradoxical beliefs.  I don't believe any government is legitimate.  Now, to be clear I'm not a Sovreign citizen type.  I recognize the authority of the state exists, I just don't think it should exist.  To me governments are no different than organized crime.  But I digress.  

    So, the fact that nations do exist, means that we need to take care to make sure the nation has a culture, because that's what holds them together.  And while immigrants are essential to a flourishing and dynamic culture, adding too many too quickly doesn't have a great track record in history.

    Lol, what does that mean?  Where have I ever claimed to be a macho man, whatever the hell that is.  Thanks for the laugh though.

     

    Thanks for the frank and honest response. I confess confusion at the notion that any government is illegitimate, and need to express the importance I give to those seeking asylum due to threat in their home countries. 

    While I can’t fault your suspicion of novel science, my question remains. What business is it of yours?

    Your thoughts are appreciated. I am left, however, wondering I f the tent image was taken at it.

     

  9. 4 hours ago, DixonHur said:

    Random thought...does anyone think the #metoo movement has a part in this?

    I know correlation and causation are different, but #metoo started in 2006 and blew up globally in 2017.

    I'm wondering because I know, that by today's definition, I could have been accused of rape several times back in the 80's and 90's.  

    And before the pitchforks come out, who here never fucked a drunk girl in HS or college?

    image.jpeg.3e96eec9a7f508f1b66a387c6a4eee07.jpeg
     

    Truth is, I regret this is so. I want to believe my experience as a kid left me unwilling to be intimate without a gung-ho, unquestionably willing partner. (I was five when my babysitter taught me to how to use my fingers to make her orgasm. An experience both scary and exciting).

    In college, I was walking home and encountered a classmate I was attracted to who was waiting for a bus well past bus hours, who declared she was very drunk. Because I held a crush, I told her to walk with me to my place, and we could use my truck to drive her home. When we got to my house, she explicitly made clear she was dtf. But, I was inhibited. I drove her home. But, I wanted to take her to bed.

    She died in a car wreck the next week, with her boyfriend at the wheel. And I am left to wonder what might have been.

    To be clear, opportunity without inhibition has always been a fact of my life, and taking selfish advantage of those opportunities is one of my regrets. But, maybe impairment doesn’t feed my ego? Or, perhaps, I aspire to not do that which was done to me.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  10. 6 hours ago, Macanudo said:

    I like lesbians. 

    Two women together in a sexual situation is absolutely erotic. But, I’m going to stir the pot, because no one likes scorched gumbo.

    Certainly, there are women who are wired to be attracted to women. But, there are women who are attracted to individuals, and who are unconcerned about the gender of their attraction. Also certainly, there are men who similarly are attracted to individuals, with gender not being a factor in their affection.

    I am compelled to make this post after understanding the experience of Marina Navratilova, and deciding she wasn’t treated fairly by those unwilling to agree with my second paragraph.

  11. 2 hours ago, DixonHur said:

    You do once you start blocking access to buildings and walkways.

    Here’s what the law says about protesting on Texas college campuses | The Texas Tribune

    As has been stated, my understanding is that obstructions were the result of police instructions. Would be interested to learn different. Posted to thank you for the image of tent assembly, thoughI am still wondering how I can be certain that photo was taken at UT.

     

    1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

    Yeah, cause that's what's happening.

    I'm talking about not being able to be against hormone treatments for children without being labeled transphobic or anti-gay.

    While I am willing to concede your point, I am left wondering why your concerns are more relevant than those of the people involved. Do you join other Surly posters in dismissing the conclusions of doctors and national institutions?

     

    I have another question, concerning immigration. Do you make a distinction between immigrants seeking asylum and immigrants disregarding the law? My understanding is that asylum seekers are the reason we are witnessing immigrants overwhelming our infrastructure. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. 1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

    Our elders had some things rights. Back in the 956 we didn’t even have doors on the shitters in the locker room. And at a visiting locker room that will go unnamed (it was Weslaco), you didn’t even have stall dividers. Just a row of latrines and you sat side by side. 
     

    You cannot be a leader of men if you’re too afraid to crap next to them. 

    Disgusted =/= afraid. OTOH, when you’ve got to go, you go.

×
×
  • Create New...