If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jezebel)   One thing feminists agree on, when a woman takes a "selfie" it is empowerful, when a man takes one, it is vanity, repulsive and a sure sign of infidelity and neediness   (jezebel.com) divider line 387
    More: Obvious, self-portraits, feminists  
•       •       •

24399 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Mar 2013 at 6:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



387 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-10 09:29:05 PM

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: And when Fox News actually manages to report things accurately, then we discuss the actual content of the article, not imaginary content based off a quote given in the article.


Accurate reporting implies that facts are being reported accurately. TFA being discussed has no such facts , it is an opinion piece on a second opinion piece.

If this were a report about some peer-reviewed scientific study, then yes, it would be a bit rude to ignore the content and attack the messenger. But TFA is nothing but opinions, so I do feel that other opinions held by the same source are completely within the context of the discussion.


When TFA is the exact opposite of the opinions you're citing, that puts a damper on it. That's what we call 'invalid sourcing'. For example, if I wrote a paper stating that ancient Egyptian women had no freedom because of an opinion piece stating the exact opposite, I would deserve the F grade it got.
 
2013-03-10 09:29:10 PM

PsiChick: spamdog: PsiChick: Bohener

I think you're thinking of Mitch McConnell.

Possibly. I have no idea why, but I am actually clinically bad at names\faces. Like, probably face-blind, and that screws over some other areas of my brain. So yes, it may well be someone else.

spamdog: It's probably worth mentioning that Jezebel's particular brand of feminism - this culture-warring kind of feminism - is fueling a backlash from a lot of men. Some places on the web now are just crawling with so-called MRA's (men's rights advocates) who read this kind of stuff and get whipped into a paranoid frenzy.
I find it tiresome and the domain of very insecure men, but I still take their side over bullshiatty misandry that Jezebel and the tumblr set pimps out.

I really don't think we are going to be ushered into an age of gender enlightenment by the efforts of people who use terms like "turtle-people" to refer the the opposite sex. If it's a fight you want, you'll get it, but don't try to dress it up as intellectual or clever or enlightened. It's not.

Well, that's a great way of proving you misunderstood just about everything. That, or you think the Republican Party is somehow representative of all men everywhere.

WhippingBoy: You don't quite get it so I'll spell it out for you: It's Jezebel. NOBODY CARES!!!

Funny, there's a lot of people replying to me. You, for one. Apparently  you must care a lot...


Oh, I care, baby. I care too much.
 
2013-03-10 09:29:19 PM
Turtle people? Sounds like some people have dropped acid.
 
2013-03-10 09:31:59 PM
Heh. I think it's cute that modern feminism can't seem to grasp the idea that you don't need to tear down men to elevate women.

Women: having a thousand duck faced pictures taken at extreme angles to hide my body shape is strengthening my body image and embracing womaninity. But don't you guys dare take an unambiguous body shot in the interest of honesty-in-pictures.

Lame.
 
2013-03-10 09:33:21 PM

Ghastly: So what is it when I take a selfie in drag?


Just an average day in the life?
 
2013-03-10 09:35:03 PM
PsiChick
WhippingBoy:
You don't quite get it so I'll spell it out for you: It's Jezebel. NOBODY CARES!!!

Funny, there's a lot of people replying to me.


..to you, who complains herself about people not paying attention to the content of the article.
 
2013-03-10 09:36:09 PM

Oh_Enough_Already: Just selfies?

After reading Jezebel, one can come to the conclusion that any and all of the endless number of behaviors which women hate men for engaging in, including, but not limited to:

philandering, watching porn, drinking, cheating, fighting, risky non-committal sex, rape, murder, throwing recyclables in the garbage, driving too fast, farting, eating too much, peeing on things, animal abuse, infanticide, matricide, patricide, smoking, rape, spousal abuse, cruelty to animals, voyeurism, exhibitionism, shyness, gregariousness, hermetic-ism, being a gadfly, homosexuality, bisexuality, asexuality, having sexuality, enjoying sports, reading books, playing video games, going out doors, staying in doors, and looking out the window.

are, when women do them, empowering, fantastic, unique things which should not only be celebrated, but are worthy of their own cable show.


You said rape twice.

/come on, you know you want to...
 
2013-03-10 09:38:41 PM

PsiChick: When TFA is the exact opposite of the opinions you're citing, that puts a damper on it. That's what we call 'invalid sourcing'. For example, if I wrote a paper stating that ancient Egyptian women had no freedom because of an opinion piece stating the exact opposite, I would deserve the F grade it got.



No, this is more like reading a pro-choice speech from a Republican Senator. While the speech may match our own opinions, that doesn't negate the fact that the same speaker has openly campaigned against equality for women.
 
2013-03-10 09:44:29 PM
I don't want to see a million self portraits of anyone. Show me photos of you doing things, or photos you've taken of interesting places or things, but I don't need to know what you look like in every bathroom in Vegas.
 
2013-03-10 09:44:40 PM

fariasrv: Ghastly: So what is it when I take a selfie in drag?

Just an average day in the life?


A obligation for Ghastly as to not disappoint the public.
 
2013-03-10 09:46:02 PM
PsiChick: (RE: Turtle People) Well, that's a great way of proving you misunderstood just about everything.

I was actually going off the urban dictionary definition of the phrase, which is about male genitals. But it doesn't matter now anyway.
 
2013-03-10 09:48:52 PM
the ha ha guy: No, this is more like reading a pro-choice speech from a Republican Senator. While the speech may match our own opinions, that doesn't negate the fact that the same speaker has openly campaigned against equality for women.

There is no reason whatsoever to believe that any particular person's views on abortion -- whether they are for it or against it -- would have any bearing on whether or not they also consider women to be inferior, superior, or equal to men in various respects.
 
2013-03-10 09:49:15 PM

spamdog: PsiChick: (RE: Turtle People) Well, that's a great way of proving you misunderstood just about everything.

I was actually going off the urban dictionary definition of the phrase, which is about male genitals. But it doesn't matter now anyway.


80% of the urban dictionary definitions are about genitals.
 
2013-03-10 09:49:39 PM

PsiChick: Has  anyone read the article? Anyone? It's the one at the top of the page, where they  actually say it's a double standard and wrong, because, stunningly enough, feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women, which TFA has a  great example of.

/Of course, for the average person in this thread to understand feminism, they'd need basic literacy first...


It's pretty obvious that most of the posters in this thread have probably never read an actual article from Jezebel.
 
2013-03-10 09:52:19 PM

valar_morghulis: Lotta angry c*nts over there.


Broads don't like to be called c*nts.
 
2013-03-10 09:55:22 PM

neongoats: But don't you guys dare take an unambiguous body shot in the interest of honesty-in-pictures.


That's what I got out of the article.

And honestly, I enjoy reading Jezebel articles on occasion. I realize there is a severe sexist slant against my gender, but they also have more moderate articles at times that aren't as hateful towards straight men.

As for me and "selfies"? I have one I use on Gravatar, and another on Twitter. Facebook pics (including my profile pic) are pretty much of my fiancée and I. I don't feel gay/straight/empowered/powerless/introverted/extroverted/shy/bold or whatever. It was a picture of me or a picture of Lurch, and I was afraid of being sued by Paramount.
 
2013-03-10 09:57:45 PM

WhippingBoy: threefiveohonetwofivego: FloydA: St_Francis_P: One thing everyone I know agrees on, is to not take Jezebel seriously.

She's just not the same since she broke up with Gene.

I lol'd.


Also, as a man, I don't understand why any of us dudes are willingly reading Jezebel in the first place. It's not FOR us in the same way Justin Bieber isn't for people who like music.

For the laughs, of course.


Yup.  I was reading Lifehacker this morning and saw  this linked at the bottom of the page and I clicked. I wasn't expecting to be enlightened or to get enraged, not even to get turned on -- I clicked for the laughs. I did laugh but also left a little confused.

I feel sorry for the people who read this shiat for insight
 
2013-03-10 09:58:11 PM

Tak the Hideous New Girl: This article really is not as man-bashing as you all seem to think.

My conclusion: you men-folk are too sensitive to internet criticism


You'll have to cut us (and some of the women commenting) some slack. After the umpteenth some article that got posted by Jezebel in a row that contained nothing but "men are evil" people have been conditioned accordingly. It's gotten so bad that some of their writers (like Hugo) are known here by name.

To put this in perspective, it would be like having the Westboro Baptist church come out with an article that talked about wasn't vehemently anti-gay. People would start pouncing before reading because almost every other thing they have other written has been militantly anti-gay.

All things considered I can't think of any site that has consistently trolled Fark as well over the years as Jezebel has. Their a hate site that spews hate like Westboro Baptist Church, what else do you expect after several years of exposure?
 
2013-03-10 09:58:30 PM
Hugo Schwyzer is a rapist and a vapid nurnie. fark anything he has to say.
 
2013-03-10 10:00:40 PM

ciberido: JohnnyC: Yes, we know feminists... You think everything men do is wrong.

Yes, we know,  antifeminists... You constantly misrepresent what feminists say.


See what I mean? Thanks for proving my point.
 
2013-03-10 10:02:08 PM
The biggest problem that I see with many feminists (not most, just many, both "paleo" and "neo") is that they cannot grasp the concept that equality is NOT a zero-sum game.  You see the same sort of thinking among religious fundamentalists in regard to gay rights.
 
2013-03-10 10:02:59 PM
I know a smokin hot bisexual chick that showed me her tits once and she uses that whole 'womyn' with a y thing.  It is just so infantile and screams of control issues.
 
2013-03-10 10:03:14 PM

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: When TFA is the exact opposite of the opinions you're citing, that puts a damper on it. That's what we call 'invalid sourcing'. For example, if I wrote a paper stating that ancient Egyptian women had no freedom because of an opinion piece stating the exact opposite, I would deserve the F grade it got.


No, this is more like reading a pro-choice speech from a Republican Senator. While the speech may match our own opinions, that doesn't negate the fact that the same speaker has openly campaigned against equality for women.


Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA  actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.

spamdog: PsiChick: (RE: Turtle People) Well, that's a great way of proving you misunderstood just about everything.

I was actually going off the urban dictionary definition of the phrase, which is about male genitals. But it doesn't matter now anyway.


Well, that's kind of an odd argument, since the feminist mainstream doesn't tend to use Urban Dictionary definitions...

The Voice of Doom: PsiChick
WhippingBoy: You don't quite get it so I'll spell it out for you: It's Jezebel. NOBODY CARES!!!

Funny, there's a lot of people replying to me.

..to you, who complains herself about people not paying attention to the content of the article.


Well, I'm actually complaining about the classic Nice Guy Brigade, who have had multiple incidents of not realizing when people are agreeing with them, showing up.
 
2013-03-10 10:05:54 PM

PsiChick: Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.


YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WHO'S READ IT!

Everyone else stopped reading when they realized "selfie" wasn't about masturbation.
 
2013-03-10 10:08:56 PM

lewismarktwo: I know a smokin hot bisexual chick that showed me her tits once and she uses that whole 'womyn' with a y thing.  It is just so infantile and screams of control issues.


They get past that by thier mid twenties. Guys to this sort of thing, too.  Trying on off-the-shelf personas and usually picking an extreme version to seem interesting.
 
2013-03-10 10:10:48 PM

threefiveohonetwofivego: FloydA: St_Francis_P: One thing everyone I know agrees on, is to not take Jezebel seriously.

She's just not the same since she broke up with Gene.

I lol'd.


Know how I know you're old?  ;-)
 
2013-03-10 10:12:25 PM

vudukungfu: TV's Vinnie: Is this going to be an ongoing thing, or should we just wait a week for them to stop overloading their tampons and return to sanity?

You want to wait a week to see if they will learn to wipe from front to back?

Or learn to drive in the snow?

Or learn to cook?

Or learn how to shut their yaps when everything is going fine, otherwise?

//Didn't think so.


I see that someone still has a few days left to go.
 
2013-03-10 10:12:59 PM

arashinogarou: neongoats: But don't you guys dare take an unambiguous body shot in the interest of honesty-in-pictures.

That's what I got out of the article.

And honestly, I enjoy reading Jezebel articles on occasion. I realize there is a severe sexist slant against my gender, but they also have more moderate articles at times that aren't as hateful towards straight men.

As for me and "selfies"? I have one I use on Gravatar, and another on Twitter. Facebook pics (including my profile pic) are pretty much of my fiancée and I. I don't feel gay/straight/empowered/powerless/introverted/extroverted/shy/bold or whatever. It was a picture of me or a picture of Lurch, and I was afraid of being sued by Paramount.


I've read PLENTY of good articles on Jezebel. But despite what someone else in this thread is championing, I don't see the article calling out this double standard as "bad" at all. It points out the double standard, it talks about where it comes from, it talks about a growing segment of men with body image issues. And basically concludes that, "shrug, it's still good for the girls, and still bad when men do it".
 
2013-03-10 10:13:04 PM
I think it's great that the thread can get this far without anyone noticing that the headline has nothing to do with TFA.
 
2013-03-10 10:14:17 PM

PsiChick: Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA  actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.



You're right that TFA did not directly uphold the double standard, but they didn't directly strike it down either. I read it more as "this is reality, get used to it".
 
2013-03-10 10:16:53 PM

jso2897: A female sexist is not a feminist.


Your absolutely right, they are a chauvinist.
 
2013-03-10 10:19:10 PM

wedun: I think it's great that the thread can get this far without anyone noticing that the headline has nothing to do with TFA.


Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown Fark.com.
 
2013-03-10 10:22:24 PM

El Dudereno: valar_morghulis: Lotta angry c*nts over there.

Broads don't like to be called c*nts.


i36.photobucket.com
Never call chics broads!!
 
2013-03-10 10:23:09 PM

FunkOut: fariasrv: Ghastly: So what is it when I take a selfie in drag?

Just an average day in the life?

A obligation for Ghastly as to not disappoint the public.


sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net
 
2013-03-10 10:24:12 PM

PsiChick: Has  anyone read the article? Anyone? It's the one at the top of the page, where they  actually say it's a double standard and wrong, because, stunningly enough, feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women, which TFA has a  great example of.

/Of course, for the average person in this thread to understand feminism, they'd need basic literacy first...


Jezebel needs basic literacy first, to be understood.  Worst writing on the Web, including American Stinker.
 
2013-03-10 10:24:27 PM

doglover: PsiChick: Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.

YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WHO'S READ IT!

Everyone else stopped reading when they realized "selfie" wasn't about masturbation.


In a thread where everyone's agreeing with the Nice Guy Brigade, 'I didn't even read it!' might not be the greatest argument there.

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA  actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.


You're right that TFA did not directly uphold the double standard, but they didn't directly strike it down either. I read it more as "this is reality, get used to it".


I actually read it as calling attention to it, which is something feminists  do actually do a lot--call attention to a problem to get people thinking about it. That's not usually upholding the problem; it's the first step to confronting it.
 
2013-03-10 10:25:29 PM
I still want to know what turtle-people means
 
2013-03-10 10:27:20 PM

CWeinerWV: I still want to know what turtle-people means


www.adolescentadulthood.com
 
2013-03-10 10:27:53 PM

PsiChick: doglover: PsiChick: Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.

YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WHO'S READ IT!

Everyone else stopped reading when they realized "selfie" wasn't about masturbation.

In a thread where everyone's agreeing with the Nice Guy Brigade, 'I didn't even read it!' might not be the greatest argument there.

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: Except everyone's opinion isn't that TFA is hypocritical, it's that TFA  actually upheld the double standard, which was never said.


You're right that TFA did not directly uphold the double standard, but they didn't directly strike it down either. I read it more as "this is reality, get used to it".

I actually read it as calling attention to it, which is something feminists  do actually do a lot--call attention to a problem to get people thinking about it. That's not usually upholding the problem; it's the first step to confronting it.


Maybe if you stop using terms like "turtle people" and "nice guy brigade", people will actually farking pay attention to shiat you have to say. But right now you are acting like the girl version of people that say shiat like "fartbongo".
 
2013-03-10 10:28:34 PM

Ghastly: So what is it when I take a selfie in drag?


My lucky day and a bull market for the hand lotion industry?
 
2013-03-10 10:30:08 PM

Ghastly: FunkOut: fariasrv: Ghastly: So what is it when I take a selfie in drag?

Just an average day in the life?

A obligation for Ghastly as to not disappoint the public.

[sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net image 573x960]


No, no, no. You're supposed to put your left hand in the photo so that we can see if you are married or not.
 
2013-03-10 10:30:19 PM

PsiChick: In a thread where everyone's agreeing with the Nice Guy Brigade


The gimmicks of the charlatans may seem quaint today, but there are thousands of charlatans among us still, using the same tried-and-true methods their predecessors refined centuries ago, only changing the names of their elixirs and modernizing the look of their cults. We find these latterday charlatans in all arenas of life-business, fashion, politics, art. Many of them, perhaps, are following in the charlatan tradition without having any knowledge of its history, but you can be more systematic and deliberate.

Simply follow the five steps of cultmaking that our charlatan ancestors perfected over the years.

Step I: Keep It Vague; Keep It Simple. To create a cult you must first attract attention. This you should do not through actions, which are too clear and readable, but through words, which are hazy and deceptive. Your initial speeches, conversations, and interviews must include two elements: on the one hand the promise of something great and transformative, and on the other a total vagueness. This combination will stimulate all kinds of hazy dreams in your listeners, who will make their own connections and see what they want to see.

To make your vagueness attractive, use words of great resonance but cloudy meaning, words full of heat and enthusiasm. Fancy titles for simple things are helpful, as are the use of numbers and the creation of new words for vague concepts. All of these create the impression of specialized knowledge, giving you a veneer of profundity. By the same token, try to make the subject of your cult new and fresh, so that few will understand it. Done right, the combination of vague promises, cloudy but alluring concepts, and fiery enthusiasm will stir people's souls and a group will form around you.

Talk too vaguely and you have no credibility. But it is more dangerous to be specific. If you explain in detail the benefits people will gain by following your cult, you will be expected to satisfy them.

As a corollary to its vagueness your appeal should also be simple. Most people's problems have complex causes: deep-rooted neurosis, interconnected social factors, roots that go way back in time and are exceed ingly hard to unravel. Few, however, have the patience to deal with this:most people want to hear that a simple solution will cure their problems.

The ability to offer this kind of solution will give you great power and build you a following. Instead of the complicated explanations of real life, return to the primitive solutions of our ancestors, to good old country remedies, to mysterious panaceas.

Step 2: Emphasize the Visual and the Sensual over the Intellectual. Once people have begun to gather around you, two dangers will present themselves: boredom and skepticism. Boredom will make people go elsewhere; skepticism will allow them the distance to think rationally about whatever it is you are offering, blowing away the mist you have artfully created and revealing your ideas for what they are. You need to amuse the bored, then, and ward off the cynics. The best way to do this is through theater, or other devices of its kind.

Surround yourself with luxury, dazzle your followers with visual splendor, fill their eyes with spectacle. Not only will this keep them from seeing the ridiculousness of your ideas, the holes in your belief system, it will also attract more attention, more followers.

Appeal to all the senses: Use incense for scent, soothing music for hearing, colorful charts and graphs for the eye. You might even tickle the mind, perhaps by using new technological gadgets to give your cult a pseudo-scientific veneer-as long as you do not make anyone really think. Use the exotic-distant cultures, strange customs-to create theatrical effects, and to make the most banal ordinary affairs seem signs of something extraordinary.

Step 3: Borrow the Forms of Organized Religion to Structure the Group. Your cultlike following is growing; it is time to organize it. Find a way both elevating and comforting. Organized religions have long held unquestioned authority for large numbers of people, and continue to do so in our supposedly secular age. And even if the religion itself has faded some, its forms still resonate with power. The lofty and holy associations of organized religion can be endlesslv exploited. (Does not apply to a certain online group) Create rituals for your followers: organize organize them into a hierarchy, ranking then in grades of sanctity, and giving them names and tides that resound with religious overtones; ask them for sacrifices that will fill your coffers and increase your power. To emphasize your gathering's quasi-religious nature, talk and act like a prophet. You are not a dictator, after all; you are a priest, a guru, a sage, a shaman, or any other word that hides your real power in the mist of religion.

Step 4: Disguise Your Source of Income. Your group has grown, and you have structured it in a churchlike form. Your coffers are beginning to fill with your followers' money. Yet you must never be seen as hungry for money and the power it brings. It is at this moment that you must disguise the source of your income.

Your followers want to believe that if they follow you all sorts of good things will fall into their lap. By surrounding yourself with luxury you become living proof of the soundness of your belief system. Never reveal that your wealth actually comes from your followers' pockets; instead, make it seem to come from the truth of your methods. Followers will copy your each and every move in the belief that it will bring them the same results, and their imitative enthusiasm will blind them to the charlatan nature of your wealth.

Step 5: Set Up an Us-Versus-Them Dynamic. The group is now large and thriving, a magnet attracting more and more particles. If you are not careful, though, inertia will set in, and time and boredom will demagnetize the group. To keep your followers united, you must now do what all religions and belief systems have done: create an us-versus-them dynamic.

First, make sure your followers believe they are part of an exclusive club unified by a bond of common goals. Then to stregthen this bond, manufactre the notion of a devious enemy out to ruin you. There is a force of nonbelievers that will do anything to stop you. Any outsider who tries to reveal the charlatan nature of your belief system can now be described as member of this devious force.

If you have no enemies, invent one. Given a straw man to react against your, your followers will tighten and cohere. They have your cause to believe in and infidels to destroy.
 
2013-03-10 10:31:35 PM

CWeinerWV: I still want to know what turtle-people means


If you allow gays to marry, pretty soon you'll have to let men marry turtles, and then who knows what kind of messed up weirdos will come out!

i105.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-10 10:34:49 PM
It's still cool to text penis pics around though, right?
 
2013-03-10 10:35:32 PM

FloydA: CWeinerWV: I still want to know what turtle-people means

If you allow gays to marry, pretty soon you'll have to let men marry turtles, and then who knows what kind of messed up weirdos will come out!

[i105.photobucket.com image 260x190]


copiousnotes.bloginky.com
 
2013-03-10 10:36:22 PM

BarkingUnicorn: PsiChick: Has  anyone read the article? Anyone? It's the one at the top of the page, where they  actually say it's a double standard and wrong, because, stunningly enough, feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women, which TFA has a  great example of.

/Of course, for the average person in this thread to understand feminism, they'd need basic literacy first...

Jezebel needs basic literacy first, to be understood.  Worst writing on the Web, including American Stinker.


Yeah...again: You really wanna go with that? 'I was supporting the Nice Guy Brigade because I couldn't be arsed to read the article'? Not sure I'd go with that one myself.

neongoats: Maybe if you stop using terms like "turtle people" and "nice guy brigade", people will actually farking pay attention to shiat you have to say. But right now you are acting like the girl version of people that say shiat like "fartbongo".


Let me introduce you to the concept of 'slang terms'. They're a great way to condense multiple ideas into one phrase instead of using an entire sentence.

doglover: PsiChick: In a thread where everyone's agreeing with the Nice Guy Brigade

The gimmicks of the charlatans may seem quaint today, but there are thousands of charlatans among us still, using the same tried-and-true methods their predecessors refined centuries ago, only changing the names of their elixirs and modernizing the look of their cults. We find these latterday charlatans in all arenas of life-business, fashion, politics, art. Many of them, perhaps, are following in the charlatan tradition without having any knowledge of its history, but you can be more systematic and deliberate.

Simply follow the five steps of cultmaking that our charlatan ancestors perfected over the years.

Step I: Keep It Vague; Keep It Simple. To create a cult you must first attract attention. This you should do not through actions, which are too clear and readable, but through words, which are hazy and deceptive. Your initial speeches, conversations, and interviews must include two elements: on the one hand the promise of something great and transformative, and on the other a total vagueness. This combination will stimulate all kinds of hazy dreams in your listeners, who will make their own connections and see what they want to see.

To make your vagueness attractive, use words of great resonance but cloudy meaning, words full of heat and enthusiasm. Fancy titles for simple things are helpful, as are the use of numbers and the creation of new words for vague concepts. All of these create the impression of specialized knowledge, giving you a veneer of profundity. By the same token, try to make the subject of your cult new and fresh, so that few will understand it. Done right, the combination of vague promises, cloudy but alluring concepts, and fiery enthusiasm will stir people's souls and a group will form around you.

Talk too vaguely and you have no credibility. But it is more dangerous to be specific. If you explain in detail the benefits people will gain by following your cult, you w ...


Eh, I don't know that I'd say that applies to either side. It's a social problem stemming from one knee-jerk reaction that got spread by idiots. Nothing very complex there.
 
2013-03-10 10:36:24 PM
The second generation.

static.metanorn.net
 
2013-03-10 10:37:46 PM

FloydA: CWeinerWV: I still want to know what turtle-people means

If you allow gays to marry, pretty soon you'll have to let men marry turtles, and then who knows what kind of messed up weirdos will come out!

[i105.photobucket.com image 260x190]


This only tells me that man has thought about giving it to an alligator snapping turtle more than once.
 
2013-03-10 10:39:53 PM

PsiChick: BarkingUnicorn: PsiChick: Has  anyone read the article? Anyone? It's the one at the top of the page, where they  actually say it's a double standard and wrong, because, stunningly enough, feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women, which TFA has a  great example of.

/Of course, for the average person in this thread to understand feminism, they'd need basic literacy first...

Jezebel needs basic literacy first, to be understood.  Worst writing on the Web, including American Stinker.

Yeah...again: You really wanna go with that? 'I was supporting the Nice Guy Brigade because I couldn't be arsed to read the article'? Not sure I'd go with that one myself.

neongoats: Maybe if you stop using terms like "turtle people" and "nice guy brigade", people will actually farking pay attention to shiat you have to say. But right now you are acting like the girl version of people that say shiat like "fartbongo".

Let me introduce you to the concept of 'slang terms'. They're a great way to condense multiple ideas into one phrase instead of using an entire sentence.


Is this another double standard you are going to be unapologetic about? If anyone here used similarly charged female targeted "slang terms", you would be(rightly) indignant about it.
 
2013-03-10 10:40:30 PM

WhippingBoy: doglover: jso2897: A female sexist is not a feminist.

Pretty much this. But sometimes it's fun to have to be disciplined by your mistress because you've been a bad boy and you know it.

Women can't be sexist because they're the oppressed, not the oppressor.


I can be anything I want, you chauvinist pig.
 
Displayed 50 of 387 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report