Apr 132011
 

If you're offended by the picture, you should really question your life decisions.

April 13, 2011

Let’s get something out of the way before I start a nuclear-powered rant.

I love words. The written word, or even the spoken word, is the greatest tool at our disposal for the dissemination of emotions, opinions, and points of view. Visual art can sometimes do a better job, but the right construction of words, the right application of grammar and syntax, is a beautiful thing.

That being said…

To the far right movement in America… suck my electronic text, you slopped-forehead evolutionary throwbacks.

The internet, for all its faults, is a forum where anyone, ANYONE, can post an opinion, a piece of art, or just use the combined electronic advancements of the last fifty years to watch cats do funny things.

Three small, almost innocuous incidents caught my attention this morning. My dear enemies in the Far Right (oh, where would this site be without you) did three things that showed me that not only are they getting craftier, they are now intruding on the realm of words, the aether of logos, and I am going guns akimbo on them.


Nuclear Bear _Strahlebaerchi_ by *pilzwolke on deviantART

Make “Gay” a Dirty Word

Please watch this video. It’s really short, but it shows just how desperate the Far Right is to make sure their agenda gets embraced by everyone instead of just white redneck hicks.

This is from “The Awakening” conference at Liberty University. Our dear speaker is going on about how “gay” implies an identity and how renaming it something else will give them edge.

Basically, he wants to make sure the Far Right phrases things in the context of “they must WANT to be gay.”

Among the more tasteful terms they wish to use to refer to homosexuality are – “Same-sex attraction,” “Same-sex intercourse,” “Sodomy,” and “Unnatural vice.” There could a whole article just on each of these, but let me say this.

“Gay” is about as dirty as “homosexual.”

If we need to just go back to scientific terms and refer to people as “homosexual,” “bisexual,” or whatever, fine. We’ll strip ALL the propaganda and tone form the conversation. Let’s see who wins.

And if we’re going to go around branding this graphically, allow me to be the first to stand up to the Caucasian vaginal penetration agenda.

Yeah, I said it.


Stand With Planned Parenthood by ~eclectic-acoustic on deviantART

Fact Are Irrelevant to My Argument

Senator Jon Kyl has a very… interesting concept of the standard debate. After getting in front of the Senate and stating that we must defund Planned Parenthood because abortion is well over “90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does.”

I won’t go over the fact that this is a horrendously erroneous statistic, but whatever he might have said (he could have claimed ants invented Telemundo), the fact remains that the crux of his argument was the statistic. His office, though, responded by saying that his argument was not meant to be factual.

But the statistic was meant to illustrate a point…

But the point was the statistic…

But the statistic was made up…

I’m going to stop before I get sucked into a Möbius strip of stupidity.

Let that sink in for a moment. The argument that hinges on a false statement is still valid because… the statement was made. Yeah… I’m going to go ahead and state that Kyl is a pedophile who can’t get an erection unless he kills a dog, because, while not factual, it is relevant to my overall argument.

Ride the Tubes!

The Tea Party is getting some training in internet guerilla warfare. Watch:

Basically, they’re being told to blog, give out negative reviews to liberal films and documentaries, and otherwise clog the internet with as much conservative cholesterol as possible. This is not only a dirty tactic, it’s downright dishonest.

What would Jesus do? Would be comment on something without knowing what it was? Would he lie to hurt his enemies?

More to the point, what do they hope to accomplish by lying, but going to classes where the main purpose is to fool people? Lying can reveal truth if used properly, but to cheat and spew falsehoods for the sheer purpose of making someone else look bad, to spread “facts” you know to be wrong, is the lowest form of debate.

It’s not even debate. It’s sick.


antics number 157 by ~readmorebooks on deviantART

There you have it, folks. The Far Right conservative movement. I really wish I could say it’s the FAR right, but this has some bleed-through to the regular conservative movement. Words have power, and if we let these self-righteous hypocrites hijack language, we lose. It’s that simple.

Link time!

  • George Takei just oozes awesome… and this ringtone proves it.
  • And finally, while I’m not one to go for overtly sentimental films, this one about a poor, elderly villager who returns to school to learn to read got the teacher in me. I’d love to see it. That’s all for today. See you Friday!

Sep 082010
 

So many words! They're overpowering us!

September 8, 2010

Beck’s on vacation, Limbaugh’s just normal crazy, Bachmann is still her same old psycho-idiot, and no one’s really done anything stupid enough in censorship this week. At least, I haven’t seen anything.

Time for an English language rant!

Arguments often lead to a basic truth. Even if one side will never admit it, there’s often one point of view that’s more valid or just made a better use of evidence and logic. However, this assumes both sides start on equal footing. If you have one side labeled a devil while the other is white-washed and wreathed in angels and flowers, you’re going to get a very different public perception.

Let’s look at a few examples.


Language by ~Avalon-Shiranui on deviantART

Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice

If one side is for life, isn’t the opposite side for death?

That’s the first thing I thought when I first heard of this debate. The names are completely inadequate to frame the debate. You can always have, say, socialism versus capitalism since both terms which describe their points of view, but pro choice and pro-life both have names that are absurd.

“Pro-life” already implies that a fetus is alive from the point of conception. If you believe in a woman’s right to chose, you understand how problematic this can be. If the debate starts with the other side saying they want to save lives, because those lives are real (a circular argument), you’ve pretty much lost. Your side will forever be branded “pro-death.”


Facts vs Opinions by ~Mysterieux936 on deviantART

Atheism

This is perhaps the only group I can think of that is named based on what it DOESN’T believe. A deist believes in a divine power but may choose not to worship it. A Christian believes that Christ is the son of God. A Buddhist follows the teaching of Buddha. An atheist believes in… atheism?

By framing atheism as the absence of a belief system when all other belief systems are based on their definition, it creates an instant hostility. We don’t call Jews “proto-Christians” any more than we call Buddhists “non-Muslims.” An atheist believes that the world and what we can analyze and interact with is all that exists. That’s it, but calling an atheist “materialistic” uses a term that’s also been tainted by meanings of greed.


Tied Up in Time and Confusion by *teagmcgillivary on deviantART

There are dozens of others.

Take, for example, “traditional family values.” Oh boy. I hate this one. The argument is never against Christian morality or fundamentalist interpretations of the Bible. It’s typically framed in the context of “traditional family values,” a term that means almost nothing without knowing whose family you’re talking about.

And trust me. I wrote speeches for Congress. I learned to write five minutes of nothing. It hurt.

“Bigot” is another that’s been getting thrown out. If you don’t agree with someone’s philosophy, you’re a bigot, or at least that’s the way some people are using the term. That used to be called multiculturalism. I don’t have to agree with someone’s world-view to like or get along with them.

Okay, that’s it. I’m tired. On Friday, hopefully the new Charcoal Streets will be ready. It’s turning into my own personal Duke Nukem Forever.


meeting a deadline by ~Pockypuu on deviantART

Links!

  • This handy infographic on the Facebook vs iPhone vs Android app war is quite telling. No matter how much people complain about Facebook every time it changes something, it still manages to draw a crowd.
  • In news that is sure to get all you history-philes all nice and moist, footage of the blitz IN COLOR has been recently unearthed in England. It shows the war in a way we hadn’t seen before. Now I’m waiting for that 3D footage of Normandy.
  • Friends of mine in the Army have told me about MREs (Meal Ready to Eat) and the verdict ranges from gut-cement to “taste of home.” Ever wonder what other countries give their troops? I have to say, if given the choice, I’d go with the French MRE.
  • Money can’t buy happiness, but $75,000 a year can buy peace of mind. That’s the claim by a recent study. Apparently, $75,000 is enough to lessen stress. It doesn’t make you happier, but it provides enough financial security to help offset many crises.
  • For those who enjoy hearing about people’s disastrous sexual escapades, check out this ad for the worst gang-bang ever.
  • And finally, in the best news in cabaret punk since the formation of the Dresden Dolls… the Dresden Dolls are getting back together for a reunion tour! Check out the announcement trailer below.