mcity: (Default)
Public: No one should hire people based on their race, their color, or their sexual preference!
Hollywood: Okay.
Public: Well?
Hollywood: Well what?
Public: Why aren't you hiring more minorities?


May. 5th, 2012 10:40 am
mcity: (Default)
>stay up until 2 AM writing a fanfic
>find app I used, despite being online, has not automatically synced to GDocs
>lost every bit of work I did yesterday
>I was about three paragraphs from finishing first chapter
>it even rolled back the title change
>have to rewrite several pages of story
mcity: (Default)
Guys, did you like Taken?

Did you wish it was a TV Series starring Ashley Judd?

Well, you're in luck!

Seriously, Judd has this way of going from "normal human" to "Jack Bauer" in about half a second. It's really, really creepy.
mcity: (Default)
Sometimes People of Color are wrong about racial things.

Actually, there is a way to logically end-run around that. Observe!

See! Totally not dehumanizing of anyone at all! It's just that when minorities agree with majorities, they're not really thinking for themselves, is all! They're just following the white person! That's not insulting in the slightest!
mcity: (Default)
If these people TRULY gave a [gentle caress] about racism, they would NEVER tell a POC like you that your opinion doesn’t matter and you should shut up. :/
Speaking as a black guy, sometimes POCs opinions don't matter and some of us should shut up.

mcity: (Default)
>person he's arguing against calls it "hearsay"
>he points out that only second-or-more-order witness testimony is hearsay


For the record, this person just keeps quoting people's posts and responding to a one or two point, while ignoring the rest, such as her being wrong about hearsay. She did this when I argued with her as well, including strawmanning furiously. It's obvious she doesn't actually read what people are saying, just what she wants to hear.
mcity: (Default)
Blog: We shouldn't question the stories of female rape victims.
Rape victim: I recant. I wasn't raped.
Blog: How do we know she's telling the truth about not being raped? We don't really know what happened!

Also from that blog;
Moreover, innocent until proven guilty only applies to certain people.
So, if these guys were in fact falsely accused, they got a taste of how black men are treated EVERY DAY by the criminal justice system.
Speaking as a black man myself who had an encounter that may or may not have been racism on my way to church this morning; if it's so bad, why do you want anyone to go through it?

The funny thing is that in the Hofstra case, the same blog came down on the side of the defendant, even though the accused were black, and tried to soft-shoe around the whole "black men false accused of rape" with "we need to look at the bigger picture!" and "there are more reasons for someone to rape than to falsely accuse!" and "how will this affect future victims?". GOOD JERB WITH THE CONSISTENT MORAL STANDARDS THAR.
The whole “let’s look at the bigger picture here” glosses over such a huge component of this issue that it’s downright nuts. The fact that these guys were African American played a huge role in every step of this case.
It seems callous to try to go macro scale before looking at the micro. This kind of stuff matters to folks who are troubled by the fact that they’re perceived as sex-crazy beasts driven by lust, especially in the context of the legal system.

EDIT: Here's a more recent post, where the blogger seems actively offended by the discussion of bias against men who are accused of rape. She also thinks they should've mentioned rape right on the poster, which she would've doubtless decried as insensitive and a trigger. in fact, she specifically showed up just to hijack the topic, and wants backpatting and hugs for it. Ironically, as some commenters pointed out, she did the exact same thing as men who make it "all about the menz" in feminist discussions.
mcity: (Default)

Breakup song by a man: Man, I'm sorry.

Breakup song by a woman: He's a sorry excuse for a man.

mcity: (Default)
Fanboys: Why is Hollywood always so derivative and unoriginal? All they do is rehash the same ideas over and over.
Marc Webb: This is Amazing Spider Man. Instead of a nerdy everyman like every version ever, Peter is going to be a punk kid with a smart-mouth, smarter mind, and authority issues. Also, the plot is partially about his parents.
mcity: (Default)
[Brit is cast as an American]
British People: Wow, Actor is really good at that.
[American cast as a Brit]
British People: Why can't they just use British actors to play Brits?
mcity: (Default)
It's like food poisoning, except it only occurs in people stupid enough to look at some sausages they know are probably expired and go "well, only ONE of them is green. The rest should be okay."
mcity: (Default)
>musician on YT has a great new video out


>video was basically paid for in full by a known scumbag currently charged with enough crimes to sent him to jail for 50 years if convicted


>musician says they don't care what the media says, they consider the scumbag a friend

mcity: (Default)
I find a security panel, get in, tell the turret to kill "Enemies", and it does so. I finish the mission, then go watch some videos of the same level on Youtube, and there's an entire section of the level (the loading dock) that I missed completely with several nifty items.

I killed people and never even got to loot their bodies. :(
mcity: (Default)
  1. Make some manner of cheesecake.
  2. Put SweetTarts on it.
  3. ???
  4. Delicious, delicious profit.
mcity: (exclamation mark)
I just wondered what I was going to have for breakfast since I don't need to go in to school early tomorrow and I thought "I'll just make a salad with the stuff in the fridge."

I'm not sure when I became an adult, but I think I like it.
mcity: (Default)

I have this thing for five minutes and I already add like three people
mcity: (Default)
>step out of house
>cross bridge
>walk for five minutes
>arrive at ASDA

mcity: (Default)

Idiot: The UK police would've been able to handle this situation without shooting someone. They would've called for backup. Their way is better.
Me: Aren't the UK police usually not armed? In fact, didn't you personally mention that they weren't armed?
Idiot: The US cops could've taken down the man without shooting him, according to their training.
Me: Leaving aside the fact that they were acting exactly like their training tells them to, you think the course of action that puts the US officers and the suspect at more risk than calling for backup is better?
Idiot: The dog could've made it.
Me: Prove it.
Idiot: The cops provoked the suspect into "making an aggressive move".
Me: Any judge would laugh at you.
Idiot: The suspect was not actually going to attack the officers, he was actually in a defensive position.
Me: A defensive position which required advancing on a policeman with weapon raised? Also, you just contradicted yourself.
Idiot: They should've tried to subdue him non-lethally.
Me: They did, it failed, and the suspect escalated the situation to deadly force.
Idiot: Those weren't non-lethal, those were gadgets. Gadgets which failed. So they shot him.
Me: They shot him because he tried to take a swing at one of them, employing deadly force.

And so on.

Currently, they're arguing that the suspect's attack on the cop was actually warranted, because there were five of them, and that the suspect was actually in "counter-stance", not aggressive stance. They are also trying to say that deadly force is irrelevant.

October 2012

  12 3456
21 2223242526 27


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 17th, 2017 08:30 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios