Patterico's Pontifications

6/27/2014

Friday Amusement

Filed under: General — JD @ 4:31 pm

[guest post by JD]

Simply reading this will make you dummerer.

At first I thought it was a circumcision smegma rant, but I was sadly mistaken.

Some things simply cannot be made up. Tell us if you can make it all the way to the end, and if you could do so without laughing out loud.

—JD

47 Responses to “Friday Amusement”

  1. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

    JD (7794a9)

  2. I don’t even ….

    nk (dbc370)

  3. Birth announcements gonna be kinda messy. But maybe tips about that and handling unhappy grammas will be her next article.

    elissa (0b3bcd)

  4. Couldn’t make it all the way thru that dreck… so many dumb sonsa bitches out there.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  5. I presume Christin is a girl? Stalin would have had her declared a parasite and sent to cook for other parasites building him a road to the North Pole.

    nk (dbc370)

  6. was there a single ittle bittle thing in that article what was at all germane to the care and feeding of gays, lesbians or bisexuals?

    No.

    This is because trannies belong all on their own cause they have their own freaky sui generis issues to deal with.

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  7. So this is how a mature society thinks?
    Oh Canada…

    mg (31009b)

  8. Why did you do that to me?

    Jim (ccd53f)

  9. OMG. As if “infant gender assignment” is a medical procedure done by a doctor, and if only you don’t consent to that procedure it won’t happen and you will raise your infant without any “assigned gender” or expectation, until it speaks up and declares itself to be a boy or a girl. Because you never look at your baby’s genitals yourself, not when bathing it, not when changing it, oh no, you’re not a doctor so you won’t be performing this complex medical procedure with its tiny chance of bad side effects.

    And yeah, I thought it was anti-circ propaganda too.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  10. When did Slate become a subsidiary of The Onion?

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  11. Dammt, ar I dummer? wha hapn tuh me?

    felipe (960c75)

  12. Whew, it wore of, er, off.

    felipe (960c75)

  13. I made it all the way to the end, and did so without laughing.

    Instead it gave me a headache. I am so tired of hearing from “science deniers” who insist gender is just a social construct and not a matter of biology, who then go on to demand that we accept their political construct that there’s no such thing as gender as if it were a natural law.

    Steve57 (334088)

  14. Is the guy serious?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  15. @ Steve57,

    I am so tired of hearing from “science deniers” who insist gender is just a social construct and not a matter of biology, who then go on to demand that we accept their political construct that there’s no such thing as gender as if it were a natural law.

    No matter how hard they try, they still have to deal with the accompanying and qualifying accoutrement (penis, breasts, vaginas). Such utter and complete denial in spite of such undeniable evidence. Why work so hard at trying to undo the facts?

    Dana (fe2228)

  16. Some people just have to try to make their point, the hard way.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  17. Patterico – serious as a heart attack.

    JD (7794a9)

  18. 1-2%????

    If it’s as high as 1-2%, I’ll eat my pizza box.

    I would estimate around .005 to .1%, with .5% as an ABSOLUTE maximum. That maximum would be around 4 TG students per average high school, or around 8-15 in most urban high schools. I seriously, seriously doubt it’s that much. And even if you figured HALF of TGs were adult-onset, and halved those figures, that still strikes me as way higher than is actually the case.

    Thinly Veiled Anonymity (c44c25)

  19. Every time I think things are bad in American, someone comes along and posts something like this. If this is all the stars-and-garters crowd has to worry about, then things must be going pretty well for the left.

    When you actually have to work for a living, priorities do tend to be rearranged.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  20. 15. …Why work so hard at trying to undo the facts?
    Dana (fe2228) — 6/27/2014 @ 5:45 pm

    If you understand the goal is to destroy the idea of objective reality, it’s not hard to understand why they work so hard to undo the facts.

    A primer on “social justice:”

    http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/What-is-Social-Justice.html#.U64WyINRq2W

    At about the 3:20 mark Jonah quotes from a UN report that confirms that people who believe in objective truths are the enemies of “social justice.”

    “Social justice” demands that the mere individual no be allowed o discern reality for him/herself.

    Demanding that the public acknowledge biological impossibilities such as “Heather has two mommies” or “Bradley ‘Chelsea’ Manning is a girl because he says so” softens up the target to the point it will say anything.

    In fact, the more ridiculous the demand that you can get the public to go along with, the greater your power. And that is what this is about. Power.

    Steve57 (334088)

  21. I’m hearing the voice of Shelley Berman in my head.

    Listen, tell my nephew he’s a boy, willya?
    He’s not too young. He’s not too young!
    Now is when he should know. Now, during his formative years.
    Don’t wait until he grows up and makes an arbitrary decision!

    (Probably misquoted from fuzzy memory.)

    Eric Wilner (3936fd)

  22. Steve57,

    I’m aware of that. I was being tongue-in-cheek because of the absurdity of the quest.

    In this case, the brains behind this social justice forget there is a God who orders the universe.

    I just put up a new Friday Amusement Part II post. For your amusement…

    Dana (fe2228)

  23. Sorry, Dana. Did I mention it gave me a headache?

    Steve57 (334088)

  24. The comments at the link are so great.

    JD (7794a9)

  25. Made it through the article, skipped the comments. Not laughing, just feeling sorry for the children of those who are (what’s the word?) accepting this nonsense.

    First, assuming that the figure given is correct — 1% to 2% of children born who might benefit from gender assignment surgery and receive that surgery have problems vs those who do not have problems — the first thing I want to know is what percentage of those who might benefit from gender assignment surgery and do not receive it have problems and do not have problems? There are (at least) four boxes in this grid, and knowing one number does not tell you anything about what choice to make.

    Then we can talk about the pros and cons of having and not having the surgery at two, ten, fourteen, twenty-one … it may be that the author is correct, but I strongly doubt it.

    htom (412a17)

  26. Made it through the article, skipped the comments.

    I wish I had skipped the comments. It’s like any disaster, horrific and fascinating at the same time. When I think my life is teh sux, I’m grateful I don’t have those types of problems.

    Hadoop (f7d5ba)

  27. @ Dana

    Why work so hard at trying to undo the facts?

    and in another post

    there is a God who orders the universe

    I think its easy. People want to believe what makes them feel good. Whether its that they are actually a different gender, or that there is an invisible entity in the sky. Let me ask you what order do you see in the universe? There are estimated to be 100 billion galaxies and in each of those 100 billion stars. Seems there is a more ordered way to bring about a particular species of primate to have a relationship with.

    Gil (27c98f)

  28. Next step: the tyranny of species assignment: “because I am a sparkly pony born in a man’s body, and if you disagree you are a hating hateful hatey hater.”

    pst314 (ae6bd1)

  29. – Does anyone in your family suffer from insanity?
    – No, they all seem to enjoy it.

    nk (dbc370)

  30. One more.

    Elwood P. Dowd: Well, I’ve wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it.

    nk (dbc370)

  31. I am shocked that Gil is alright with this brand of idiocy.

    JD (7794a9)

  32. You are…funny, Mr. Feet. You are very, very concerned about gay marriage. But for people who have possibly improper procreative adaptors, you are pretty judgey. Mayhap if transsexuals wanted to marry each other, you would be more accepting.

    It’s a puzzle.

    Seriously, this is a vital topic on my campus. Woe unto anyone who doesn’t use proper jargon or show hushed respect.

    Me, I just wish we would have a culture of leaving people alone instead of using differences as political power bars.

    Simon Jester (b13fce)

  33. And nk, thanks for quoting my hero. I’m with Elwood. I recommend pleasant.

    Simon Jester (b13fce)

  34. Honestly, I don’t know what that article is about. By the 2nd paragraph I realized I was reading the offering of a frustrated ‘author’ who, I have no doubt, is presently working on a novel.

    Thomas Hazlewood (c57300)

  35. And again, Monty Python said it best: You can’t HAVE babies! You don’t have a WOMB!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgp9MPLEAqA

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  36. T’s just don’t belong in a discussion about L’s and G’s and B’s Mr. Jester.

    And L’s and G’s and B’s don’t belong in a discussion about T’s.

    “LGBT” conflates stuff what shouldn’t be conflated.

    Lesbians should never be confused with women what want to grow beards and piss standing up.

    Gay people should never be confuzzled with guys what want to grow boobies.

    Duh?

    Yes.

    Duh.

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  37. Someone should explain to this person that the admonition to not assign gender roles to a newborn in this scene was a joke,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbnv6eHKjCQ

    Lorem Ipsum (cee048)

  38. When I was young and worked in a fruit market (no pun intended), I’d go to the (real) farmers marks in Michigan and buy apples by the truckload. Then I’d bring them back and sort them for a nice display. I’d throw out the ones that had wormholes, or rotten spots, or big bruises, or the skin was broken, or were runty, or just hadn’t ripened properly. All rejects, all samee samee in the dumpster.

    Duh?

    Yes.

    Duh.

    nk (dbc370)

  39. farmers *market* (Although those Menonites are a wily lot and might have seen us as marks.)

    nk (dbc370)

  40. that’s apples to apples though Mr. nk

    this is more about nice respectable well-dressed tax-paying gay oranges versus tranny apples what feel like they’re a banana trapped in an over-ripe papaya

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  41. Wisdom from a child actor on the hit movie Kinderegarden Cop. “Boys have penises, and girls have vaginas.” The author obviously has never seen the movie, or taken a biology class. That is all

    Jo (7a6932)

  42. In most cases, the sex of a child is not in doubt.

    Where there is a problem, there shouldn’t be any quick decision, and lots of people should be consulted. There may be all sorts of different opinions as to what the situation is.

    This article is written like this is a common problem.

    Sammy Finkelman (9ec422)

  43. Hey, JD. My daughter is now an alumna of U of I at Urbana-Champaign too. She came home “from college”, yesterday. She was living in a dorm, a girls dorm, with a roommate, sharing a detached bathroom, meal plan at the cafeteria, the whole shebang. I’m so proud, and only twelve.

    It was a music camp.

    nk (dbc370)

  44. @JD
    I did not say i was ok with this. I was just pointing out another example of people ignoring evidence and offering a reason why they do so. It is a logical fallacy related to wishfull thinking and special pleading.

    Gil (a5bb43)

  45. Gil talking about people ignoring evidence and logical fallacies is funny.

    JD (191f33)

  46. In most cases, the sex of a child is not in doubt.

    Where there is a problem, there shouldn’t be any quick decision, and lots of people should be consulted. There may be all sorts of different opinions as to what the situation is.

    This article is written like this is a common problem.

    Sammy, the writer — and all “progressives” who have kept up with the latest ukases of their betters — believes that in all cases a child’s gender (not sex) is in doubt until the child is able to express hir own opinion on the subject, which, once expressed, must be taken as gospel until the child changes hir mind. The prevailing orthodox view on the left is that genitals are irrelevant to gender. All they determine is sex, which is utterly without significance. There is no reason to expect sex and gender to correlate, although by sheer happenstance they do correlate for > 99% of people. But that must be a fluke, and we can’t assume it will continue.

    Milhouse (b95258)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3126 secs.