Related Articles

63 users responded in this post

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url
mygif

I happen to like my girls with dead stares, thank you. It’s not like they don’t do that in all porn anyway.

ReplyReply
mygif
Milkman Dan said on July 7th, 2008 at 9:25 am

Goddamn… I was going to joke that “I have a dead expression fetish” but Ex beat me to it. But honestly, they don’t always have a dead stare. Sometimes they look disgusted!

ReplyReply
mygif

I sort of disagree on the “science will fix things”… thing.
It’s pretty deplorable when used as an excuse for inaction, but I think it’s still quite likely as a theory. I mean, we might not have perfected fusion, yet, but look at how far science in general has gone in the past 60 years or so. We barely had cars, movies, or antibiotics 100 years ago.

ReplyReply
mygif

We’ve done a lot better at making new things than getting rid of old things with science, though, which is why we’ve managed to fill not just the land but an ever-increasing portion of the ocean with junk.

ReplyReply
mygif

I love how the fundamentally retarded right-wing stretch for validation in the comments, pretending that sitting for two hours to watch a single movie makes liberals into hypocrites when they blast at mindless consumers sitting around doing nothing for their entire lives.

Still trying desperately to pretend that capitalism is the foundation for democracy. When in reality, the manner in which political power flows through a corporation only matches totalitarian dictatorships and neither republican nor democratic political processes. I mean seriously, when was the last time any worker was able to vote for those who held the office of manager?

ReplyReply
mygif

Right there in uncanny valley huh? (3-d girls and dudes)

What the hell? Ok..now people are just making shit up, I’m not saying they weren’t before but now it’s going too far. (Wall-e)

Those Zwinkies things are just creepy as all hell.

I don’t know what Jesse Helms did, when I saw he died I looked to make sure it wasn’t Jesse Ventura, I would have been sad if he had died, I also don’t really care about what Jesse Helms did.

Science will fix all of our environmental problems, in the form of designing a society which doesn’t create as many pollutants, I don’t expect scientists to magic magic cure-alls for our environmental issues I do expect them to help by making sure we don’t destroy it any more than we already have, in the next 3 decades. That doesn’t mean the everyday person can’t do something to help those scientists.

Simply becoming involved in any flame war is grounds for being a loser, that means you actually care enough about whatever the war is about to start arguing with some moron from another state (yes state_ who barely types english in a comprehendable manner, but that doesn’t make getting in those any less fun.

ReplyReply
mygif

I think the red lights of the world should protest against Wall-E too. ¿I mean, Hal 9000, the T-800 eyes and now AUTO?

RED IS GOOD!

ReplyReply
mygif

Pro-Fat Activists? Christ on a stick – I suppose running a website about how you’re an opressed minority is easier than actually getting down the gym once in a while.

ReplyReply
mygif

Gay nerds have better things to do with their time.

No, no, gay nerds just *draw* their porn, because it’s easier to draw furries than it is to render them.

ReplyReply
mygif

I had one friend who thought I shouldn’t take joy in Helms’ death because he was ‘friends’ with Bono and worked with him in some vague way to do something vague and unspecific about AIDS in Africa. Which mostly made me respect Bono a tiny bit less…

Oddly, I’ve liked PvP more recently then I have in a year or so. Not enough to start rereading it regularly, but enough to check it every couple of weeks or so…

ReplyReply
mygif

One of the hardest aspects of Catholicism is trying to exercise compassion and sadness at the death of all people, and hope for their repentance and salvation. In Helms’ case, I can’t help it; I will say that I have sympathy for those family and friends who found it within them to love the man, for whom I’m sure his death hurts as much as were my own father to die; but as a public figure, good riddance to bad rubbish. He devoted his life to hatred and obstruction of the public good.

And now to see him honoured as a “patriot” and a “conservative icon” is just disgusting; Jesse Helms hated America, though he would not have seen it in those terms; as for “conservative icon”, do non-racist conservatives quite understand what giving him that appelation means? Yeesh.

ReplyReply
mygif

A friend of mine was saying that it’s good we’ve used up all the oil, as now humanity is pursuing cleaner, more efficient means of power. I snapped back, that’s not good, that’s not something to be proud of, that’s like being a massive alcoholic and being proud of your new found sobriety because you DRANK ALL OF THE LIQUOR!

Re: John: Really? I’ve never met a gay furry nerd.

Also, when leaving the theater for Wall-E, there was an overweight man and his even more overweight son panting from walking up the aisle, each with a massive soda in hand. I can’t help but wonder what was going on in their heads.

ReplyReply
mygif

Anybody who continued reading PVP after the hideous plot abortion that was Shekky (or whatever the midget troll’s name was) is a mystery to me.

ReplyReply
mygif

@Blake

The fat folks I know enjoyed the movie.

ReplyReply
mygif

“Science will fix things” is not a fundamentally corrupt argument, because in a way, it has to be science that fixes things. We need new industrial methods, new forms of energy production and distribution, and new techniques for environmental reclamation — we need the fruits of research. Where it turns wrong is when it’s used to hand wave away the problem — “science” is some kind of fairy figure that’s going to take care of it for you, “scientists” are always somebody else locked away in a mysterious hidden clean room with infinite goddamn funding and a giant erection at the thought of letting you maintain your current lifestyle. Scientists would appear to be some kind of altruistic cosmic collective who spawn whole cloth from the rotting carcass of university brownstones and take perverse delight in hiding all those jetpacks they invented back in WW2.

As for Mssr. Helms, I feel the same way about his death as I felt about Jerry Falwell’s — it’s a sobering pity that a soul should die so lost.

ReplyReply
mygif
violent_rabbit said on July 7th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Gay nerd and Pervy women. There is more than enough creepy 3d art in my fandoms thank you. 😛

ReplyReply
mygif
alexander seussavich said on July 7th, 2008 at 12:47 pm

re: flamewars

There’s an old saying – arguing on the internet is like the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded.

ReplyReply
mygif

“– (PS: PVP is still shit and getting worse. This concludes your update of what I think about PVP. I eagerly await more spamflame.) –”

You know who else said that? Hitler.

ReplyReply
mygif
malakim2099 said on July 7th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Godwin’s Law strikes again!

But you know, as a fat person, I did enjoy Wall-E anyway. Of course, I’m an active fat person, go fig. 😉

ReplyReply
mygif
karellan said on July 7th, 2008 at 1:07 pm

The problem with science fixing things is that most scientific endeavors these days are extremely privatized, so advancements tend to come about for the benefit of the company or organization funding the research rather than an innate desire to improve the world. That’s why you see so many ads for medication on TV these days. Not because the scientific community is spewing out amazing new drugs all the time but because companies find a slight variation on a drug that already exists, and it’s different enough that it can be marketed without getting sued. Environmental technologies like hybrid cars and whatnot aren’t really a result of trying to improve the world but a result of trying to find a new marketing angle. Innovations don’t have to be different enough to cause drastic change, just different enough to affect the perceptions of the consumer and avoid copyright infringement.

The privatization of science is especially scary in medicine. Lots of discoveries used to be made in the public sector in universities and such, but with so much money to be made in the private sector, who would take that route now?

ReplyReply
mygif

“– “Science will fix things” is not a fundamentally corrupt argument, because in a way, it has to be science that fixes things. We need new industrial methods, new forms of energy production and distribution, and new techniques for environmental reclamation — we need the fruits of research. Where it turns wrong is when it’s used to hand wave away the problem — “science” is some kind of fairy figure that’s going to take care of it for you, “scientists” are always somebody else locked away in a mysterious hidden clean room with infinite goddamn funding and a giant erection at the thought of letting you maintain your current lifestyle. Scientists would appear to be some kind of altruistic cosmic collective who spawn whole cloth from the rotting carcass of university brownstones and take perverse delight in hiding all those jetpacks they invented back in WW2. –”

Yeah, basically what he said.
When the price of gas hit $4 / gallon, you know what science did? It made smaller cars.
When landfills started pilling up with useless crap, you know what science did? It recycled.
When flooding washed out the Midwest in ’94, science gave us dams and levies that spared us additional pain in 2008.

But people don’t like driving smaller cars, they don’t like sorting out paper and plastic, and they don’t like paying for expensive infrastructure projects that only see serious use once or twice a lifetime. Science doesn’t work if we don’t apply it. And applying science can be inconvenient or expensive. So, sure, put your faith in science today. But tomorrow, when you’re eating a big bowl of oil secreting, CO2 absorbing soylet algae for breakfast because science had to bail your ass out for wiping out the agricultural industry with climate change and shitting where you eat, don’t come crying home again. Science doesn’t give you what you want. It gives you what you deserve.

ReplyReply
mygif

Also, the paragraph about Jesse Helm’s death reminded me of what Thomas Disch (recently dead himself) wrote when Algis Budrys died. So cool.

ReplyReply
mygif

Why do you hate fat people MGK?

ReplyReply
mygif

The second thing I thought of when I heard Jesse Helms died — after “Good riddance” — was wondering if he had taken all that evil and hatred he had with him into whatever nether region awaited him, or if it became like the dream demons in “Freddy’s Dead” and went off to find a new host. Then we’d have to worry about THAT kid growing up and going into politics.

It doesn’t look like they’re going to do it, thank God, but I was worried that first day they were going to do a Ronald Reagan/Gerald Ford/Tim Russert -style wall-to-wall coverage thing on the old bastard’s death and funeral. I’m old; my stomach couldn’t have handled that.

ReplyReply
mygif

“Science will fix things” is not a fundamentally corrupt argument, because in a way, it has to be science that fixes things. We need new industrial methods, new forms of energy production and distribution, and new techniques for environmental reclamation — we need the fruits of research. Where it turns wrong is when it’s used to hand wave away the problem — “science” is some kind of fairy figure that’s going to take care of it for you.”

What this guy said.

ReplyReply
mygif

Also the whole maintaining current standard of living doesn’t just apply to thirsty 4x4s (or gas guzzling SUVs to speak American) – we aren’t going to be able to feed the world on organic bulgar wheat – we need to seriously look at more intensive methods of farming and GM crops – both things that are as unpopular with the one side of the argument as the thought of government regulations on fuel effciency are with the other. I also probably won’t be too popular saying that Nuclear Fission is where we should be putting our money either – but it is. Lots of people are working very hard to get alternative energies up to scratch, and we should be chucking money and resources at them, but we can’t dismiss nuclear as easily as we do if we want to be taken seriously. My brother doesn’t think nuclear energy is the big creepy monster that a lot of enviromentalists do and he works in the alternative energy sector.

ReplyReply
mygif

“People who get into flamewars over video game consoles. You’re all losers. End of story.”

THANK YOU.

ReplyReply
mygif

I also probably won’t be too popular saying that Nuclear Fission is where we should be putting our money either – but it is.

No, it isn’t. Nuclear fission plants need refined uranium, of which – guess what – there is precious little left naturally occurring. So that means we need to refine raw uranium into fuel, which is (shock!) energy intensive. On top of that nuclear energy is horrendously expensive and always has been (there’s a reason they only survive with massive government subsidies); it’s technologically difficult to handle and requires expensive, high-tech plants and people with lots of degrees and such. And finally there’s always going to be the issue of dealing with waste.

None of this should be taken as a “no nukes” standpoint. We have the plants, so let’s use them for the time being. But expanding nuclear energy portfolios is a losing proposition when compared to solar, wind and tidal – especially when you consider that these forms of energy are already about competitive with nuclear in terms of cost and aren’t yet mature technologies. (Which is to say there’s ample room to improve the efficiency and price of these technologies, whereas nuclear is never going to get significantly more efficient or cheaper.)

ReplyReply
mygif
Brad Reed said on July 7th, 2008 at 4:22 pm

I misread the second-to-last topic at first glance. “People who get into flamethrower fights over video game consoles?”

If only.

ReplyReply
mygif
Joysweeper said on July 7th, 2008 at 4:34 pm

Ooh. I remember when I was like twelve, browsing the Internet for the first time, looking for interesting things to read, and I was ambushed by a creepy render-porn popup. Popup killers are a lifesaver.

ReplyReply
mygif
karellan said on July 7th, 2008 at 4:48 pm

“I remember when I was like twelve, browsing the Internet for the first time…”

I feel old.

ReplyReply
mygif
New Lurker said on July 7th, 2008 at 5:00 pm

“Pro-Fat Activists? Christ on a stick – I suppose running a website about how you’re an opressed minority is easier than actually getting down the gym once in a while.”

Classy. Real fucking classy, itbix. You can’t hate people for their own good, you know.

And MGK? Using fat jokes to draw laughs is not exactly humorous for those who are fat and are trying to lose that weight. If shame made you thin, there wouldn’t be a single fat person in the country.

ReplyReply
mygif

“No, it isn’t. Nuclear fission plants need refined uranium, of which – guess what – there is precious little left naturally occurring. So that means we need to refine raw uranium into fuel, which is (shock!) energy intensive. On top of that nuclear energy is horrendously expensive and always has been (there’s a reason they only survive with massive government subsidies); it’s technologically difficult to handle and requires expensive, high-tech plants and people with lots of degrees and such. And finally there’s always going to be the issue of dealing with waste.

None of this should be taken as a “no nukes” standpoint. We have the plants, so let’s use them for the time being. But expanding nuclear energy portfolios is a losing proposition when compared to solar, wind and tidal – especially when you consider that these forms of energy are already about competitive with nuclear in terms of cost and aren’t yet mature technologies. (Which is to say there’s ample room to improve the efficiency and price of these technologies, whereas nuclear is never going to get significantly more efficient or cheaper.)”

So you’re saying we should Use Nuclear until alternative energy is viable? That’s pretty much exactly what I said there MGK.

ReplyReply
mygif

This Wired article has some great points on realistic/practical ways to help save the environment.

About Nuclear Power, in particular:
[…]A UK government white paper last year factored in everything from uranium mining to plant decommissioning and determined that nuclear power emits 2 to 6 percent of the carbon per kilowatt-hour as natural gas, the cleanest of the fossil fuels.[…]
And also:
[…]Only wind comes close — and that’s when it’s blowing.[…]

So, yeah, I guess we’re all saying the same thing. “We should use Nuclear until alternative energy is viable.”

ReplyReply
mygif

@SC: So now, Helmes is a Zwinky?

ReplyReply
mygif

Uh oh, New Lurker dun got his feelin’s hurt!

If you really ARE trying to lose weight then you shouldn’t be bothered by people who don’t like fatasses.

Because you, yourself, are clearly not to fond of fatasses, if you’re working on not being one.

ReplyReply
mygif

I regard fatties in much the same way as I regard alcholics and drug addicts. Mostly in the “I only pity them if they’re genuinely trying to sort their condition out” sense. I certainly don’t regard it as a legitimate lifestyle choice and whilst genetics play a part in determining someone’s build it certainly doesn’t play nearly as big a part as some would claim.

ReplyReply
mygif

Rephrase that last bit – whilst genetics play a part in determining someone’s build I’m certain that it’s often used as an excuse by people who aren’t prepared to make an effort to adress their weight issues.

ReplyReply
mygif
Singular Quartet said on July 7th, 2008 at 6:05 pm

“There is no guarantee of somebody genetically engineering the algae that will eat carbon dioxide and shit oil, and more likely than not if somebody does it will be horrible and also eat trees and people and stuff. Or it will be intelligent and insist that if it’s going to eat all that carbon dioxide for us, that we have to have a TV channel that plays The Simple Life 24/7 because it loves Paris Hilton thaaaat much. Of course, that won’t happen, because we’re not going to see that algae in our lifetimes, not on any practical level.”

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/16/petrol-bugs/

Not gonna be put into full production until 2010

ReplyReply
mygif

On the subject of Helms. I’d never heard a good thing about him until today. There’s a guy who had an editorial in today’s Washington Post that shows he did one cool thing. When a Soviet ship was in the Mississippi in the mid-eighties a guy jumped off the boat twice. The Soviets tried to say he fell both times. Helms didn’t believe it and rather than do like everyone else and just try to hurry the ship along and get it out of US waters he tried to delay it and supoenaed the ships captain to appear before some committee he chaired. He made sure it was gotten and not just misdirected by hiding it in a carton of cigarettes from his home state.

ReplyReply
mygif

God save us from “pro-fat activists.” Gluttony and over-consumption are what got the entire world into this environmental crisis and the US into its economic depression, and both are reflection of the personal choices millions of people make every day.

The thing that gets me is this: if two thirds of Americans are overweight, and further that half of those people qualify as obese, that technically means that only one-third of all Americans have a weight within healthful guidelines. People at or below healthful BMI are actually the minority.

Which kinda makes me wonder how fat people can claim they’re an oppressed minority. In addition to being fat, they obviously need some help with their maths.

ReplyReply
mygif

Not to disagree with the science-as-handwave point, but this article seems relevant: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece

ReplyReply
mygif

Hmm, and here I saw the Zwinkies title and thought you were going to hate on some new form of Twinkies that I had magically overlooked.

But yeah, I hate those things.

Twinkies are still good though.

ReplyReply
mygif
Andrew W. said on July 7th, 2008 at 10:17 pm

The cheapest food being the worst for you might have something to do with that. All that organic stuff is a lot pricier. Less fat ice cream was two bucks more at the supermarket when I walked by to get milk.

But I overeat. Nobody forces me to stick all that food in my mouth. So I’m not saying it like an excuse.

Scientists […] take perverse delight in hiding all those jetpacks they invented back in WW2.

I knew it! I knew those motherfuckers were hiding them!

ReplyReply
mygif

I’ve never heard anyone claim fat people are an oppressed minority. MGK linked to “pro-fat-activists”*, but do they actually claim to be minorities?

And “oppression” isn’t they issue here. Mockery and bigotry is. I haven’t seen Wall-E yet (I fully intend to; it sounds like an amazing movie), but there have been many movies (Shallow Hal, Big Mamma’s House, Norbit, etc.) in which the entire premise is to make fun of people for how the look. These movies would be equally sad if they demeaned pale people or people with curly hair. (“Why don’t you get a tan, asshole?” and “Hey, Rapunzel, they’re called ‘hair-curlers’!”, respectively.)

Regarding bigotry… Well, you need only read the comments here to see how many people are desperate to find a socially acceptable hatred to adopt.

For the record: Yes, I am a fat person, but no, I’m not proud. But I do deserve to be treated with as much respect as the next person.

*Is this what they call themselves? Seriously? “Activist” I’m fine with. Fighting bigotry of any sort is a worthy goal. “Pro-fat” seems a bit silly, though. Everyone knows the health risks and stigma endured by being fat, and I don’t think its a state of being anyone wishes for. Then again, there are pro-anorexia crazies, so there’s obviously people out there who think it’s the bee’s knees to destroy your health with ill-advised diet plans.

ReplyReply
mygif
Getawayfromme said on July 8th, 2008 at 12:41 am

Science isn’t going to “Solve” our problems.

Let us say for the sake of the argument, that science, tomorrow, invents an algae or bacteria that converts atmospherical carbon into fuel that you can run in an unmodified car. Pretty much a golden bullet wouldn’t you say?.

But the world uses more than 100 milllion barrels of oil a day. A barrel of oil is about a half of a cubic mtr in size.

There simply is not the ROOM to build plants to hold the algae or bacteria you would need to provide that much fuel per day. Not to mention the sheer cost of build the equipment.

Then you need a paralell distribution method.

And even if it is cheaper, people will STILL burn oil.

We are GOING to use up all the oil that exists. Fact.

ReplyReply
mygif
Getawayfromme said on July 8th, 2008 at 12:46 am

Derek, you don’t deserve as much respect as a fit person. You have no self control, that is not a VIRTUE for us to respect, it is a FAULT for us to disrespect.

MAYBE we ought to hide our disrespect for you, but only because we ought to pride ourselves on our OWN conduct, and offering pointless distress to others does no good.

But I don’t RESPECT you.

(Hey, everybody, you know “that line” that lies between banning a post and letting it go through? This is RIGHT UP AGAINST THAT LINE. I try to not delete comments here, but don’t push me. Keep it at least sorta civil. — MGK)

ReplyReply
mygif
New Lurker said on July 8th, 2008 at 12:48 am

“Uh oh, New Lurker dun got his feelin’s hurt!”

No, I’m just pointing out what a boneheaded reply that was. It does nothing except point out ix’s own accepted bigotry (and your own now, for that matter) that mocks with nothing more to say. “Lookit those fatties, they should go to the gym because they’re fat, yuk yuk yuk”. Sorry, but that’s not going to fly with this progressive. I’m not a “pro-fat activist”, but I do demand that you respect fat people because they’re human beings like you and me.

“If you really ARE trying to lose weight then you shouldn’t be bothered by people who don’t like fatasses.”

Sure, and if you’re a feminist trying to eradicate bigotry you shouldn’t be bothered by people who say sexist, racist, or able-ist shit on a daily basis, right? How can you say that with a straight face? Not everyone can put up with a society that’s stacked against them even when they’re trying to lose weight, or just live with it if they’re comfortable in their own skin. Just look at ixbit’s comment: someone who can be entirely at ease with their body, fat or not, will always face that sort of shit when they try to say (or be) something society doesn’t accept. I am calling him, and you, on those sorts of comments. And the use of the word ‘fatasses’ to denote someone who is fat, even when they’re not an ass? Uncalled for altogether.

“Because you, yourself, are clearly not to fond of fatasses, if you’re working on not being one.”

Someone who is trying to lose weight is doing so for their own reasons, but rarely it’s self-hatred for being fat. Rather it’s either from genuine concern to their body, or (and this is the big one) from being shamed by a society that constantly tells them that “you’re obese!” and “you’re diabetic!” and “you’re a monster that should not exist!”. Living a sedentary lifestyle is much more troubling to your health than being fat. You can be fat and still be healthy, you know. And with that, I’m done talking to your prejudiced ass.

“I regard fatties in much the same way as I regard alcholics and drug addicts. Mostly in the “I only pity them if they’re genuinely trying to sort their condition out” sense.”

So you’re comparing being fat to having a substance problem, or not being “normal”? Lovely. Whatever happened to being fat because that’s who they are, or because they’re born that way? Don’t worry, I’m getting to your genetics bit momentarily. And I say again: you can’t hate people for their own good.

“I certainly don’t regard it as a legitimate lifestyle choice and whilst genetics play a part in determining someone’s build it certainly doesn’t play nearly as big a part as some would claim.”

I am not too sure about that. Try making a few Google searches on Gina Kolata, or making a naturally thin person fat (and vice-versa). Besides, poor nutrition and a sedentary lifestyle affects EVERYONE, be they fat or thin people.

“Rephrase that last bit – whilst genetics play a part in determining someone’s build I’m certain that it’s often used as an excuse by people who aren’t prepared to make an effort to adress their weight issues.”

That’s even worse phrasing. I don’t know your friends and acquaintances, but making a blanket statement that people stop trying to lose weight because they’re not fucking ready to address their weight issues by blaming genetics is out of left field. Stop trying to keep the “they’re fat because they’re lazy” meme alive, OK?

I’ll just leave the discussion dropping this link. Maybe you can learn something new.
http://kateharding.net/but-dont-you-realize-fat-is-unhealthy/

ReplyReply
mygif
New Lurker said on July 8th, 2008 at 12:51 am

“Derek, you don’t deserve as much respect as a fit person. You have no self control, that is not a VIRTUE for us to respect, it is a FAULT for us to disrespect.

MAYBE we ought to hide our disrespect for you, but only because we ought to pride ourselves on our OWN conduct, and offering pointless distress to others does no good.

But I don’t RESPECT you.”

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is pretty much the reply I was expecting to pop up sooner or later. Fat people have no self-control, they don’t deserve basic respect, we should internalize our hatred for fat people and those different from us, etc.

ReplyReply
mygif

Look, folks, obesity has an absolutely huge genetic component. It just does, and if you’re insisting that it’s primarily a “self-control” or a lifestyle issue, then you don’t know what you’re talking about, plain and simple.

Me, I’m a little overweight. I weigh a little over 200 pounds, and at 5’8″, I could probably stand to lose a bit. A friend of mine has the exact same dietary habits I do, probably even better (I have a weakness for pizza), and weighs 100 to 150 pounds more. She’s not secretly sneaking whole boxes of Twinkies, she doesn’t exercise less than I do (save that she has a little trouble getting around because she has knee problems due to her weight), it’s solely and strictly that her body turns more of those calories into fat.

Obesity, genuine obesity as opposed to “a little bit chunky” or “could stand to get to the gym” body issues, is a genetic condition. Being an asshole to fat people is kind of like walking up to Stephen Hawking and telling him he just needs to work out some, the lazy little weiner.

ReplyReply
mygif

“Uh oh, New Lurker dun got his feelin’s hurt!”

You do realize how much that made you sound like a middle school bully, right? You want to point and go “Ha ha!” while you’re at it?

The thing that confuses and angers me the most about anti-fat sentiment is: Why are you so pissed off at fat people? Really, even if you think its some kind of failure on their part (which I’ll argue against), how is it hurting you? Do you really think they took food out of the mouth of starving children?

ReplyReply
mygif

“– Being an asshole to fat people is kind of like walking up to Stephen Hawking and telling him he just needs to work out some, the lazy little weiner. –”

Seriously, how lazy do you have to be when you’re talking out of a digital box? So he’s got all the time in the world to contemplate the mysteries of the universe, but he can’t drop and give me twenty? What a worthless human being.

/asshole

ReplyReply
mygif

Ignoring New Lurker, I don’t “hate” fat people. At least, not especially.

Indeed, I would actually like to congratulate Chris on his insight! It’s just bullying, and I don’t do it because I hate my victim or anything.

I use others as objects on which to prop myself up when I bully. The victim is just a thing to me, as a bully. I certainly don’t “hate” them, and it certainly wasn’t “bigotry.”

ReplyReply
mygif

Derek: What’s worse, Shallow Hal tried to play it both ways.

New Lurker: I contend that you can hate people for their own good, but that would be in cases of actual moral failure, such as bigotry, rather than the genetics + tiny bit of behavior that is involved with being overweight. Hating to help the haters. Pretty unlikely to work, but still. And metaphorically speaking, bigotry and obesity would be almost opposites.

Ex: Amorality and using people is even more frightening than hatred. But I suppose I don’t particularly give a fuck if our interactions are online.

For those of you who think MGK is actually against fat people, look at the original post.

ReplyReply
mygif

Should’ve tied hating haters back to Jesse Helms. Damnit. I’m slipping.

ReplyReply
mygif
New Lurker said on July 9th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Kyle: I said you CAN’T hate people for their own good. Shaming people into something and then saying “but I’m trying to help them because…” doesn’t help. The way someone can hold a two-way system where they can actively hate (or if that’s too strong a word, “bully because I feel like it”) someone and then immediately claim they do so because they’re concerned for their victim is accepted in this country. I call bullshit.

And just since we’re using recently dead people (fuck Helms), I’m sure George Carlin would agree with me on this one. Not that he liked the extremely fat American people himself: made it quite clear in “Life is Worth Losing”.

ReplyReply
mygif
Rob Brown said on July 9th, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Ex had better be joking about viewing certain people as “things” for his amusement. Not that it would be funny if he were, but it’d be easier to accept than the thought of an honest to god adult human being walking around in society capable of that much cruelty.

@ Everybody who made an anti-fat-person comment…

LOOK. First of all, if somebody’s supposed “lack of self-control” is not hurting you, then holding it against them is idiotic. In fact, you’re exhibiting a “lack of self-control” yourself by not being able to keep these kinds of insults to yourself, so if we follow your own logic you don’t deserve any respect.

Second, and again following your own logic, you do realize that you now need to start treating all kinds of other people like crap, right? Alcoholics, drug addicts, smokers, people with gambling problems, people who feel the need to have sex regularly, anybody who has a particular habit that they have trouble breaking, etc. Anybody and everybody who is incapable of total self-denial and restraint, 24/7/365, is fair game for your scorn. You’ve said you are against people without self-control, and that encompasses a lot of people in a lot of different weight ranges. If you don’t hate–excuse me, I guess I should say “use” in Ex’s case–them all equally, then it has nothing to do with self-control. It has to do with you judging people on their looks, which is not cool.

I haven’t seen Wall-E yet but I’ll take MGK’s word that the movie isn’t “anti-fat.” It might perhaps be “anti-gluttony”, but that’s different from being “anti-fat”.

ReplyReply
mygif

Zifnab wrote: “But people don’t like driving smaller cars,”

Sure they do, if the smaller cars are *nice enough*.

Ford only knows how to disdainfully poop out crappy ‘econoboxes’ like the Escort, in a form of corporate passive-aggression, but people still buy lots of Miatas and BMW Z3s and Audi TTs.

American automakers’ problem is that they respect old-fashioned musclecars, not engineering. Honda, on the other hand, makes little dancing bipedal robots. They’re engineers.

ReplyReply
mygif

MGK wrote: ” And finally there’s always going to be the issue of dealing with waste.”

As of this point in time, it’s a bit easier to control and keep track of than carbon emissions.

ReplyReply
mygif

Jon, nobody’s going to suggest that nuclear is a better option than oil or coal. The question is whether it’s better to invest in nuclear over solar or wind, and that argument just doesn’t fly.

(One more argument: nuclear reactors take a long time to construct and bring online safely. Solar farms and windmills, not so much.)

ReplyReply
mygif

The Special No-Prize (aside from flashing me back to my X-Men collection) had me spraying coffee on my keyboard.

On alternative energy: I have a policy. No-one carrying a store-bought bottle of water ever gets to bitch to me about the price of anything else. I don’t need to verbalize my disagreement, I can either walk away or strike said stupid person with a ninja sword if I happen to be carrying one.

The easiest way to reduce energy usage and price is … TAH-DAH! Use less of it! The economics are so simple it seems to have completely eluded the Conservative (NEW Green!(TM) government of Canada [GREEN ™!].

In fact, you’ve reminded me of a recent incident … gotta go post. Or work, maybe.

ReplyReply
mygif

Don’t know if anybody’s reading this, but I just wanted to point out my feelings on this whole ridiculous fat exchange.

I’m a skinny bastard; about 6′, with a weight of around 155-160. However, I feel lucky for this. I eat a decent amount of crap; I just happen to have a metabolism that’s easy enough to get along with. Some days (although not frequently) I’ll wind up only eating McDonalds and pizza; some days I’ll wind up only having salad. I don’t believe that this is a result of being particularly strong-willed, but simply as a result of luck. I do agree that there is a problem regarding American’s attitude towards obesity, but that doesn’t mean that you can blast people just for being overweight. Respect should be awarded for how people act, not what they look like.

ReplyReply
mygif

Don’t worry about me, Rob. I run on intelligent self-interest, so I won’t, like, rape anybody.

Unless I’m sure I can get away with it.

ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please Note: Comment moderation may be active so there is no need to resubmit your comments