Incels

[ThatOwlWoman]

It's my operating theory that people are their most basic selves when they are most uninhibited. An anonymous message board removes a level of social inhibitions. Observing them when they are drunk, drugged or very angry removes another level of inhibitions. It's also notable if they are drunk, drugged or very angry a lot. LOL

It they have socks, that's also when they are most likely to slip up.

It's a good reason why Friday and Saturday nights are among my most favorite nights for "hunting". It's not like many of the wackadoodles will go out dates.

Heh, true dat.

What is the purpose of deliberately tagging after a particular individual, poking and prodding until they provide an emotional response, in your opinion? Some kind of validation? A sense of power because they got someone angry? If so, what does the poking-prodder get out of that?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The uber-idiot Dubya Bush admitted that Texans have a problem with nuance, and although you're a transplant, nobody illustrates that more than you, Oom....

Translation: If someone raped and murdered my family, C'est la vie! They aren't in control of themselves because there's no such thing as free will.

I disagree, neef.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Why leave these passages in their holy book? Simple: It allows men first class status, and women as submissive second class persons.

In the increasing fewer places where it holds influence.
Unfortunately, Middle America would have to be regarded as one of those places, Owl.

Here in Boston, where we've elected a Chinese broad mayor and a lesbian broad governor,
good luck trying to find somebody in the coffee shop who can quote a single biblical passage.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Translation: If someone raped and murdered my family, C'est la vie! They aren't in control of themselves because there's no such thing as free will.

I disagree, neef.

Not seeking vengeance is obviously impossible, Oom, because we haven't the free will to assess the situation objectively.
We're genetically predisposed--both of us-- to being protective of our families and fierce in our retaliations.
That's a survival mechanism for the species, not free will.

Why would you even imagine saying "C'est la vie?"

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I find the entire idea of "cultural appropriation" to be divisive and intolerant. It's used by people who want to remain separate.

Not always but so?

Is there a difference between a group of Cherokee isolating themselves in Oklahoma and preserving their heritage, including accusing others of cultural appropriation, and a group of Germans doing the same in Idaho? Irish in Boston? Not to me there isn't.

You may have a misunderstanding of how the phrase is used, at least among modern indigenous peoples. What they are objecting to is the use of the personal and of the sacred in ways that they see as either commercial, blasphemous, or both. Most devout Christians, for instance, might have some issues with someone taking Eucharist/Communion and using it as a way to make money -- like in a movie about evil killers or something. Both of us can recall outrage when the religion was perceived to be mocked in popular entertainment.

Wishing to keep the sacred ritual of the sweat lodge sacred is not isolation. It is reclaiming a part of culture that was lost. Being annoyed at ppl who dress up on Halloween in what are to some sacred garments is not isolation either. There is nothing wrong with a culture that has been absorbed into a larger culture wanting to keep some aspects of their personal identity for themselves. As white ppl we are welcome to eat all the fry bread we like, but we risk offense if we dress up like "Indians" while doing it.


While I fully support people remembering their heritage as a psychological requirement for a sense of identity, when they cross over to isolation and denying others absorbing different cultures, I see it as a problem.[/QUOTE]

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

In the increasing fewer places where it holds influence.
Unfortunately, Middle America would have to be regarded as one of those places, Owl.

Here in Boston, where we've elected a Chinese broad mayor and a lesbian broad governor,
good luck trying to find somebody in the coffee shop who can quote a single biblical passage.

Nice, but the rest of the country outside of large cities is different, you've probably noticed.

Are the parking lots around your Boston churches pretty full on Sundays?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Heh, true dat.

What is the purpose of deliberately tagging after a particular individual, poking and prodding until they provide an emotional response, in your opinion? Some kind of validation? A sense of power because they got someone angry? If so, what does the poking-prodder get out of that?

It varies for different people, but for me it's simple understanding.


If people had poked and prodded George Santos a little more, do you think less people would have voted for him? He's a consummate liar. Poking and prodding would reveal those lies.

Similarly, the Internet is full of blowhards, liars and malicious people masquerading as honest, truthful, benevolent people. Poking and prodding them reveals which people are which. That's the personal side of it for me; satiating my curiosity on identifying who is truthful and who isn't.

The public side is sharing this information with members of the forum. It's one thing to call someone an asshole and a liar. It's another level for an asshole and a liar to publicly reveal that fact to all after being poked and prodded.

Consider the members of this forum who are consistently angry, never share personal experiences and spread hate onto innocent people. Unless a JPP member is looking for a shouting match/fight, most people just shy away from such nasty people, like avoiding homeless drunks on the street begging for handouts. A few people are curious about how such people ended up in such a deplorable state of life. I'm curious about why Diesel is so angry, why Earl is so demented, and why STY seeks to murder Americans.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Nice, but the rest of the country outside of large cities is different, you've probably noticed.

Are the parking lots around your Boston churches pretty full on Sundays?

Yes, full of kids skateboarding. The ones that have parking lots, that is. Downtown city churches don't.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

It varies for different people, but for me it's simple understanding.


If people had poked and prodded George Santos a little more, do you think less people would have voted for him? He's a consummate liar. Poking and prodding would reveal those lies.

Similarly, the Internet is full of blowhards, liars and malicious people masquerading as honest, truthful, benevolent people. Poking and prodding them reveals which people are which. That's the personal side of it for me; satiating my curiosity on identifying who is truthful and who isn't.

The public side is sharing this information with members of the forum. It's one thing to call someone an asshole and a liar. It's another level for an asshole and a liar to publicly reveal that fact to all after being poked and prodded.

Consider the members of this forum who are consistently angry, never share personal experiences and spread hate onto innocent people. Unless a JPP member is looking for a shouting match/fight, most people just shy away from such nasty people, like avoiding homeless drunks on the street begging for handouts. A few people are curious about how such people ended up in such a deplorable state of life. I'm curious about why Diesel is so angry, why Earl is so demented, and why STY seeks to murder Americans.

Yes, exactly what I mean. What would cause an individual to cull such people from the herd and constantly follow them around and try to evoke an emotional response? What does such a gadfly gain from doing this? I get why YOU will poke and prod -- you say for learning which is acceptable, but also I think that you just enjoy it. Evidently the ppl who poke and prod for an emotional reaction are getting something from it as well, but it's not knowledge of human behavior.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Not always but so?



You may have a misunderstanding of how the phrase is used, at least among modern indigenous peoples. What they are objecting to is the use of the personal and of the sacred in ways that they see as either commercial, blasphemous, or both. Most devout Christians, for instance, might have some issues with someone taking Eucharist/Communion and using it as a way to make money -- like in a movie about evil killers or something. Both of us can recall outrage when the religion was perceived to be mocked in popular entertainment.

Wishing to keep the sacred ritual of the sweat lodge sacred is not isolation. It is reclaiming a part of culture that was lost. Being annoyed at ppl who dress up on Halloween in what are to some sacred garments is not isolation either. There is nothing wrong with a culture that has been absorbed into a larger culture wanting to keep some aspects of their personal identity for themselves. As white ppl we are welcome to eat all the fry bread we like, but we risk offense if we dress up like "Indians" while doing it.

When people wonder why our nation is so divided, all they have to do is look at the trend of self-isolation. Consider Niblick's idea to partition the US into different countries. Do you really think that will end up as a lasting peace or do you think it will more closely resemble Northern Ireland and Ireland, North and South Korea, North and South Vietnam, and the American Civil War?

People mock Christians daily on JPP. I don't see many LWers chastising those who do it. If a RWer mocked Kwanzaa, the reaction is quite different.

No one is going into the sweat lodges and trying to stop them or mocking them. Consider the RW complaint about churches being forced to perform gay marriages. Legitimate complaint or not? I believe it's not a legitimate complaint...although it should be watched since some people do, indeed, advocate it. Usually the same people who mock Christians daily. LOL

The difference is that the sweat lodge people are seeking to deny others to have their own sweat lodges. It would be the same as one Christian church telling another church they can't have communion because it's "cultural appropriation"....especially if they dress in a white robe and a funny hat.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Yes, full of kids skateboarding. The ones that have parking lots, that is. Downtown city churches don't.

People take a bus or taxi to get there? I was just curious about attendance numbers.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Not seeking vengeance is obviously impossible, Oom, because we haven't the free will to assess the situation objectively.
We're genetically predisposed--both of us-- to being protective of our families and fierce in our retaliations.
That's a survival mechanism for the species, not free will.

Why would you even imagine saying "C'est la vie?"

So you advocate doing nothing about the rapists and murders. Fine.

However, if others seek to punish and hang those criminals, who are you to say they aren't programmed to do so?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Yes, exactly what I mean. What would cause an individual to cull such people from the herd and constantly follow them around and try to evoke an emotional response? What does such a gadfly gain from doing this? I get why YOU will poke and prod -- you say for learning which is acceptable, but also I think that you just enjoy it. Evidently the ppl who poke and prod for an emotional reaction are getting something from it as well, but it's not knowledge of human behavior.

There are multiple reasons, both noble and malicious. IMO, it's important to determine intent. Ask them. Determine if they are truthful or not.

The malicious people could be doing it for a few different reasons. Sadism and lack of self-esteem are two different reasons that strike me as most common. Some people like to pull the wings off flies because they are cruel. Others, IMO the majority, do it to feel better about themselves. This is especially noticeable in the misogynists, racists, religious bigots, etc.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

The difference is that the sweat lodge people are seeking to deny others to have their own sweat lodges. It would be the same as one Christian church telling another church they can't have communion because it's "cultural appropriation"....especially if they dress in a white robe and a funny hat.

Wrong. The people who object to the use of a sacred ritual feel that it is being appropriated by those who do not understand the deep significance involved. They have no power to deny anything. Think how offended many Christians would be if a strip club act involved a dancer pretending to be a minister and handing out wafers and wine to the audience as part of her act. They too don't have any power (other than complaining to city hall) to stop it, but they don't like it and find it offensive. Can you blame them?

Back to the sweat lodge, which is a good example. Northern Europeans have similar contraptions, called saunas. The actions are the same -- undress, go into a special space, throw water on hot rocks, get steamed. This lacks the deep religious significance though of an indigenous sweat lodge ceremony. So you can see why there is no denial of the process of taking a sauna/sweat. The only objection to what is seen as non-indigenous appropriating something that they already have (the sauna) and trying to inject some religious meaning to it, without understanding or caring what that meaning is. I don't think that non-indigenous ppl who do this are necessarily being intentionally offensive. They just need their consciences raised, as we used to say.

As for Kwanzaa, I've seen that mocked as a "fake holiday." I don't know a single person who celebrates it though. Do you?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Wrong. The people who object to the use of a sacred ritual feel that it is being appropriated by those who do not understand the deep significance involved. They have no power to deny anything. Think how offended many Christians would be if a strip club act involved a dancer pretending to be a minister and handing out wafers and wine to the audience as part of her act. They too don't have any power (other than complaining to city hall) to stop it, but they don't like it and find it offensive. Can you blame them?

Back to the sweat lodge, which is a good example. Northern Europeans have similar contraptions, called saunas. The actions are the same -- undress, go into a special space, throw water on hot rocks, get steamed. This lacks the deep religious significance though of an indigenous sweat lodge ceremony. So you can see why there is no denial of the process of taking a sauna/sweat. The only objection to what is seen as non-indigenous appropriating something that they already have (the sauna) and trying to inject some religious meaning to it, without understanding or caring what that meaning is. I don't think that non-indigenous ppl who do this are necessarily being intentionally offensive. They just need their consciences raised, as we used to say.

As for Kwanzaa, I've seen that mocked as a "fake holiday." I don't know a single person who celebrates it though. Do you?

Disagreed. The entire idea of "cultural appropriation" is to deny others the right to do the same or similar cultural activities, traits, food, dress, etc.

FWIW, Native Americans aren't the only culture to invent the concept of sweat lodges as you pointed out...and not all Native American tribes had sweat lodges.

Again, I've yet to see any Westerners complain about "cultural appropriation". Why do you think that is, TOW?

https://www.cedarbarrelsaunas.com/history-of-saunas.html

The Sauna was invented by the Finns over 2000 years ago. The Saunas were originally designed and used as a form of a bath. The sauna was a place to cleanse the body and was considered a sterile environment. In fact, in Finland, women often gave birth in the sauna!

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

There are multiple reasons, both noble and malicious. IMO, it's important to determine intent. Ask them. Determine if they are truthful or not.

The malicious people could be doing it for a few different reasons. Sadism and lack of self-esteem are two different reasons that strike me as most common. Some people like to pull the wings off flies because they are cruel. Others, IMO the majority, do it to feel better about themselves. This is especially noticeable in the misogynists, racists, religious bigots, etc.

I wonder if it isn't because IRL they don't have much in the way of emotional reactions (good or bad) to them, so it's a way of satisfying that need? My observations from this forum and others seem to indicate that a negative emotion is what is desired by the coat-tailers. You'll notice that when they don't get one, it only accelerates their poking. There is at least one here who likes to crow about "meltdowns" when the achieved goal of annoying someone into an angry response is achieved. It's almost like they are saying "I'm someone now! I got ___ to get pissed!"

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Disagreed. The entire idea of "cultural appropriation" is to deny others the right to do the same or similar cultural activities, traits, food, dress, etc.

FWIW, Native Americans aren't the only culture to invent the concept of sweat lodges as you pointed out...and not all Native American tribes had sweat lodges.

Again, I've yet to see any Westerners complain about "cultural appropriation". Why do you think that is, TOW?

Probably because we do not have a specific cultural identity of our own. We have things like McDonald's (ugh), movies and movie stars, and Coke that have been exported and enjoyed around the world. But none of us think of those things as uniquely OURS and get annoyed at other countries for copying them. IOW they have no emotional or sacred meaning to us.

The sweat lodge thing was just an example and not meant to indicate that every indigenous group had them. As I said, they have zero power to deny anyone else the use of a sweat lodge, or a Halloween costume where the wearer is dressed like a "chief," or the use of tobacco in ritual. The conquerors always insist that the conquered assimilate and give up their own heritage and culture. The reason is because allowing them to keep it might undermine what the conquerors see as the rightful culture and identity.

Why are you all so fearful of that? Why is it so threatening to you if a group of American citizens practices their ancient religion, sometimes wears their traditional garments, or prefers their own art and music over popular culture?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I wonder if it isn't because IRL they don't have much in the way of emotional reactions (good or bad) to them, so it's a way of satisfying that need?

My observations from this forum and others seem to indicate that a negative emotion is what is desired by the coat-tailers. You'll notice that when they don't get one, it only accelerates their poking. There is at least one here who likes to crow about "meltdowns" when the achieved goal of annoying someone into an angry response is achieved. It's almost like they are saying "I'm someone now! I got ___ to get pissed!"

Agreed it's satisfying a need, as selfish as that may be. The actual circumstances would vary a bit but you are probably correct that it directly relates to their real life....or lack of one. If a person is unhappy on JPP, I'm guessing they are unhappy IRL too.

The concept of "coat-tailers" is an interesting observation. My first thought is that it's a form of tribalism, collective unity. They find a tribe and hang with them through thick or thin. Notice those that never attack their own tribe and always attack others. They seem to be satisfying a need of belonging.

Since JPP is a political forum, the two major tribes are LWers and RWers. It fascinates me how quickly, and how predictably, the tribalists line up on a subject regardless of importance.

Remember the Depp vs. Heard? Brittney Griner? Who gives a fuck? The Tribalists give a fuck. LOL

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

A lighter take on cultural appropriation. lol

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Agreed it's satisfying a need, as selfish as that may be. The actual circumstances would vary a bit but you are probably correct that it directly relates to their real life....or lack of one. If a person is unhappy on JPP, I'm guessing they are unhappy IRL too.

The concept of "coat-tailers" is an interesting observation. My first thought is that it's a form of tribalism, collective unity. They find a tribe and hang with them through thick or thin. Notice those that never attack their own tribe and always attack others. They seem to be satisfying a need of belonging.

Since JPP is a political forum, the two major tribes are LWers and RWers. It fascinates me how quickly, and how predictably, the tribalists line up on a subject regardless of importance.

Remember the Depp vs. Heard? Brittney Griner? Who gives a fuck? The Tribalists give a fuck. LOL

It is weird how celebrity news like that gets some people so emotionally involved.

By "coat-tailing," I mean the practice of an individual singling out another individual and following their posts on the forum, and interjecting (esp. when the topic isn't of much interest otherwise) comments to the target's posts in order to get their attention, and eventually an angry reaction. You've had individuals do that to you frequently. So have I. So has Evince, Phantasmal, Jade to a lesser degree, Christiefan, Legion. It's weird.