OK, you can stop now: new 'stupid things' thread

[Ignatius]

We love food, man. If ladies can't get down with that I guess I better drop out of the running.

[Little Sixes Little Nines]

not only do we love food, but we also love meat. and if you order the steak, we are that much closer to meat.



MEAT.

[Good Intentions]

Ross Douthat on Dr Kevorkian's Victims:

We do not generally praise doctors who help dispatch their terminally ill patients, as Kevorkian repeatedly and unashamedly did. Even when death is inevitable and inevitably painful, it is not considered merciful to prescribe an overdose to a cancer victim against her will, or to gently smother a sleeping Alzheimer’s patient.

The difference, of course, is that Kevorkian’s clients asked for it. That free choice is what separates assisted suicide from murder, his defenders would insist.

But this means that the moral case for assisted suicide depends much more on our respect for people’s own desire to die than on our sympathy for their devastating medical conditions. If participating in a suicide is legally and ethically acceptable, in other words, it can’t just be because cancer is brutal and dementia is dehumanizing. It can only be because there’s a right to suicide.

A right that reading Douthat makes me cherish. I find reading his non-sequiturs unbearable, and cannot continue living a life which forced me to endure that.

[davy]

This is on CNN's front page this morning?

Fuck this guy.

I get the science behind not having the procedure done: There are nerve endings that are being severed during the procedure, and it is normally not medically required. But generally speaking it has not been proven to be medically harmful either, though there have been rare occasions of infection and excessive bleeding requiring stitches.

Besides being an important aspect of some religions, circumcisions improve hygiene, which is effective in limiting urinary tract infections and the transference of STDs. And speaking of sex, having a circumcised penis saves the young man of the potential embarrassment of having a new partner look at his nude body and say "What in the hell is wrong with your... penis."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/06/07/granderson.circumcision.ballot/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

[YojimboMonkey]

double fuck that guy with giant uncircumcized cocks

[dumbfish]

That part is unnecessary and perpetuates some dumb ideas, but in fairness, his next two lines are "Or something like that. Maybe."
His point isn't that uncut dicks are icky, it's that the government shouldn't be involved in the debate.

[coldforge]

Uncut dicks ARE icky, though.

[peacocks]

I kinda like 'em. Anyway I think the bigger message that the dude is going after is a good one: people shouldn't be told what to do with their baby dick skin.

xp y'know what dumbfish said.

[davy]

The "stupid thing" about the article isn't necessarily the message behind it, it's that he completely undermines his credibility by expressing himself in just as careless and ignorant a fashion as the activitists he's criticizing.

[Thermofusion]

I say cut em, then provide em with a supply of SenSlip detachable artificial foreskins for that true modular dick experience.

[elpollodiablo]

If you take seriously statistics indicating persistent violence against women on college and university campuses, you have to acknowledge that disdain for due process and onerous restrictions on speech and belief that have long prevailed on campus do not alleviate sexual violence. Arbitrary, unfair disciplinary procedures, expansive speech and harassment codes, and intrusive "sensitivity trainings" have denied students fundamental freedoms for years, in the hope of creating "safe" and "nurturing" environments for women and other presumptively vulnerable groups. Yet, according to frequently quoted Justice Department studies, 20% to 25% of women on campus will be the victims of sexual assault this year. Recent campus murders, rapes, and alleged rapes dramatize these frightening statistics.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/04/the-save-act-trading-liberty-for-security-on-campus/237833/

Wha... what? "If you take seriously statistics..." ?   

[elpollodiablo]

In insisting that violence prevention programs on campus respect basic individual liberties I feel compelled to add that I'm neither denying nor dismissing the crime of sexual violence (I expect to be accused of doing so), nor am I suggesting that Congress avoid even trying to alleviate it. The SaVE Act is salvageable; the criticisms I've raised could easily be addressed without undermining the bill's intent or altering its basic architecture. It reads like a bill that was drafted with the help of anti-violence groups (which have officially endorsed it) and little if any input from civil libertarians.

Won't someone please, PLEASE think of the civil libertarians?!

[peacocks]

Those are some awkward, awkward sentences jumbled together up in there. Also if you have to say "I'M NOT SEXIST BUT" then you probably are... a dickwad.

[RavingLunatic]

If you take seriously statistics indicating persistent violence against women on college and university campuses, you have to acknowledge that disdain for due process and onerous restrictions on speech and belief that have long prevailed on campus do not alleviate sexual violence. Arbitrary, unfair disciplinary procedures, expansive speech and harassment codes, and intrusive "sensitivity trainings" have denied students fundamental freedoms for years, in the hope of creating "safe" and "nurturing" environments for women and other presumptively vulnerable groups. Yet, according to frequently quoted Justice Department studies, 20% to 25% of women on campus will be the victims of sexual assault this year. Recent campus murders, rapes, and alleged rapes dramatize these frightening statistics.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/04/the-save-act-trading-liberty-for-security-on-campus/237833/

Wha... what? "If you take seriously statistics..." ? 

I mean, I think a healthy degree of skepticism is always due when it comes to most social statistics, but unless you've got some specific reason for doubting the validity of some given statistic, merely prefacing your axe-grinding polemic with "If you take seriously statistics..." is....dickwadish.




We had a Kiwi at our house for a few days this last week (one of my brothers friends from when he stayed a semester in New Zealand a year ago), and he came to the 18-and-over baseball league games that my brothers and I play in on Sunday. A jet of some sort flew over low during the game, and I joked that that was the planned flyover for our games. This led naturally into a discussion of pre-game national anthems. I asked David (the Kiwi) if they play the national anthem at New Zealand sporting events. He said something like, "Yeah, at international events." I think he must've assumed I was just talking about international events because playing the national anthem at regular domestic events is plainly absurd. He was pretty surprised when I told him that we play the national anthem at pretty much any sports event imaginable, professional games, college games, high school games, little league games. Of late (post-9-11), merely playing the national anthem before Major League Baseball games has not been considered sufficiently patriotic; "God Bless America" must also be played during the seventh-inning stretch. David must not have been to many US sporting events because he seemed pretty appalled by all this, which is the only appropriate action if you ask me. I guess what I'm trying to say is that US nationalism is out of control and playing the national anthem before sporting events is ridiculous.

The college my brother graduated from is the only college in the entire country, to my knowledge, that does not play the national anthem before sporting events. This is very controversial here, and recently it was reported that they would be reconsidering their no-anthem policy at a college board meeting. I thought sure they would cave to pressure and decide to start playing the anthem, but to my surprise and delight, they stuck to principle and will continue to not play the anthem. Glimmers of sanity and hope still shine through.

And as long as I'm ranting against US chauvinism, is anybody else sick of every single reporter/broadcaster, whenever the topic of a soldier or the army comes up, falling all over themselves to thank the troops for "protecting our freedom." I can't recall a single instance of the topic of the army or soldiers coming up in a major TV broadcast and the words "protecting our freedom" not being uttered. I mean, shit, something like 60-70% of US citizens are opposed to the war in Afghanistan, and virtually everyone is sick of the whole Iraq affair. And yet every TV personality feels the need to keep spewing transparent humbug about illegal and immoral wars being fought to "protect our freedom." Oh, jeesh.

[elpollodiablo]

So much lawlz http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/30/bon-iver-vmas_n_941885.html

Beyonce is pregnant! Aside from that, though, Bon Iver's Justin Vernon is so totally over the VMAs.

The folk singer praised Bruno Mars, Kanye and Jay Z and Adele, as well as admitting that Beyonce's pregnancy is "awesome as shit, culturally speaking," but seemed a little miffed with the institution as a whole, in a post he published to his site.

"Don't we seem dumb?" he asked, "Does a moonman mean what it did back then?" Music, he says, is the loser here.

"Why do we NEED this shit so bad? Why don't we just have MUSIC? DO music? soul? I don't know," he says.

The entire thing on his website is absolutely fucking priceless. Read it aloud with Sarah Palin-style inflection for extra giggles

[dumbfish]

Pollo, you're just cranky because you no longer fit in your light brassiere.

[elpollodiablo]

we could be doing WORK period on EARTH period

[Greg Nog]

Should our mom's cry?

[Ignatius]

Should our mom's cry?

oops xpost sorry but

should our?

[elpollodiablo]

hahaha

[nonotyet]

oh my

[Thermofusion]

No shout outs to Gaga?

[davy]

I watched it with my ladyfriend for the first time in years and years and I couldn't quit thinking -- Nirvana once played the VMAs.

The only person connected with this damn thing who deserves any props whatsoever is Dave Grohl, who desperately pleaded with the audience to "Never lose faith in real rock 'n' roll music!"

Though I fear his plea fell on deaf ears.

[Thermofusion]

I was shown the Lady Gaga thing. The monologue was dumb but god help me I actually kinda liked the performance? Also I flat-out refused to believe that Jay Z and Kanye murdered *anything*

[elpollodiablo]

I'm still astonished that there are adults who sit around and watch the VMAs but my surprise is probably ringing pretty hollow since I've been registering it annually for the better part of the last decade.