mcity: (Default)

An interesting video about the difference between objectification of men and women, double standards thereof, and the social pressures behind them. Here are the articles she refers to and links in the description.

Am I Sexist? - Common Sense Atheism

Why Shameless Objectification Can Be A Good Thing - Jezebel

Why men can't - and shouldn't - stop staring at women - Ian Brown for The Globe and Mail
mcity: (Beyond Good and Evil 2)

On Saturday, I go to ASDA, buy a jacket, and forget to have it deactivated. I pause when the beepy thing goes off, and clear it up with the Customer Service desk--right next to the exit--show the nice lady my receipt, and be on my way.

Today I find a vlog from KatersOneSeven, who was nearly arrested over a mistake leaving JC Penny. At least, that's what I gleaned from the comments, since I took one look at her teary face in the video and went NOPE.avi.

Funny thing is, one of the top comments said their heart was broken, and "the UK" was with Kate. Really? All of it? Did you ask everyone?
mcity: (Default)
A guy smashes some windows in a restaurant with what's basically a long crowbar. Police show up, one with a dog, and ask him to stop. He ignores them. One pepper-sprays him, and he shrugs it off, likely from drugs. As the nearer officer tries to back away and draw his weapon, the suspect advances, and is shot dead by the other officer, holding the dog, who has had his gun drawn and pointed at the suspect the entire time.

I was having a somewhat intense discussion with someone who thinks the shooting was unjustified.

Among their ridiculous claims;

-Suspect was just "intimidating" the police.
-The dog could've stopped him.
-He had the crowbar behind his head, and could not have swung. (I pointed out, several times, that it takes a fraction of a second to swing a crowbar from that poisition, once in range.)
-The nearer cop could've dodged. (Note how the cop is actively trying to get away from the perp.)
-The officers could've stopped and disarmed the suspect in hand-to-hand. (Yes, at substantial risk to themselves.)
-UK cops never kill anyone. (Such a shooting was what kicked off the London Riots last year.)
-Using "Bobbies" to refer to cops is patronizing.

Most prominently, they keep insisting there are "other options" when it's been shown there were no other options that did not present a risk to the nearer officer. Release the dog? Suspect has time to swing. Farther cop tackles the perp? Suspect has time to swing. "Martial arts"? Unnecessary risk to the officers. Pepper spray? Tried, didn't work. Taser? Couldn't be drawn in time to be effective, even if the suspect couldn't resist it with the drugs he was probably on.

The funny thing is that they are constantly saying UK cops would've been able to resolve the situation without guns. They receiving different training and equipment and face different challenges. No matter how many times I pointed this out, they kept insisting that they could've done it, along with a few dozen other Straw Men. As evidence, they cited a case where a guy assaulted three cops and struck them with a crowbar, leading to the hospitalization of two. Yep, the UK cops are doing so much better.

The biggest fly in their ointment, of course, is that UK cops don't usually carry guns in the first place.
mcity: (Beyond Good and Evil 2)

White family. Mixed scrubland/savannah. Driving on the left, English on t-shirts. Not in the US. Most likely somewhere in the British commonwealth or former British colony. Recent video, warm climate present in the Southern Hemisphere. Areas most likely with English as first language and the requisite biomes are are Australia and New Zealand. Quick check on the band's website reveals they are, in fact, Aussies. If forced to guess one from the video, would've gone with Australia because better odds by population.

mcity: (nope.avi)

Let me summarize:
1. Police break up Occupy UCD camp, arrest only those who interfere.
2. Angry crowd surround police, prevent them from transporting prisoners.
3. Angry crowd of dozens threatens about a dozen armed police, saying they will let the cops go if they release the prisoners, and if the cops let the prisoners go, they will continue to protest peacefully. (7:00)
3b. The implication is that if the prisoners are not released, the cops will not be let go, and the crowd may stop protesting "peacefully".
4. Police do not comply with angry mob.
5. Mob partially disperses when backup arrives, leaving only about a dozen sitting-down students with interlinked arms directly blocking the path.
6. Officer(s) issue verbal warnings to the protestors directly blocking the path.
6b. The police cannot carry the prisoners over the sitting down prisoners.
6c. Those protestors were obstructing officers, under California Penal Code 148, and were subject to arrest.
7. Officers attempt to remove obstructing students via gentle physical compulsion. It fails.
8. John Pike spends several minutes shaking up some pepper spray. The seated students were warned by other protestors. And chose not to leave, to continue obstructing the cops.
9. John Pike deployed pepper spray against the students.
9a. Verbal requests and gentle physical compulsion were both tried and failed. The next step, under standard police procedure and that of UC Davis, is pepper spray. Check just about any police manual in America. Or Canada. Or Tasmania, even.
9b. The next step after that is physically wrestling with protestors, which carries a risk of dislocations and other injuries. Pepper spray, by contrast, is most likely to cause an hour or so of discomfort.
9c. According to a man who literally wrote the book on the matter, the police officers used appropriate force.
10. Students were broken up and arrested, still struggling, while the crowd continues to chant.
11. Someone recording the video edits out everything but 9 and 10, then posts it online.
12. Some English professor says the students had their mouths forced open by the cops, and were coughing blood 45 minutes later.
12a. This forcing is not visible in any video, nor were photos taken, nor have his remarks been corroborated.
12b. Someone "still" coughing blood 45 minutes after the incident should've been removed to medical care by then. Coughing blood is not a noted effect of pepper spray, and again, no pictures, video, or corroboration.
13. Shortly thereafter, partially due to an article by Wolfe in the Guardian about an alleged coordinated crackdown on OWS, the term "militarization" enters the Occupy rhetoric in reference to police. It sounds scary, so everyone uses it, despite it being false. The only thing cops have in common with the military is that they wear helmets, uniforms, and boots and carry firearms. Riot cops are often not even issued firearms.

Anyone who is actively threatening cops cannot be reasonably considered a "peaceful protestor", unless one stretches the definition of "peaceful" to mean "is not actually charging at them with a knife".

I hate to put politics on this LJ, I really do, but the common impression of this incident is so slanted that it's effectively worthless. Either the people who edited the original videos were actively trying to obscure OUCD's behavior, or worse, they thought threatening and obstructing the police was entirely irrelevant in light of the fact that the police were mean to them. And that second possibility terrifies me. It means they think they should get to break the law and not suffer the consequences. The people who claim to want equality really want special privileges for themselves. And this is a constant; Occupy versions of the events often leave out the fact that they confronted police, not the other way around.

If a cop lies, he has to answer to his superiors or IA. A reporter lies, she has to answer to an editor. Someone lies by omission to Youtube, and who are they accountable to?

Four legs good. Two legs better.
mcity: (Default)

It uses the latest up to date digital film techniques but didn't cost a fortune to make. It' is in fact the first digital home movie. None of the backgrounds even exist - they were all created in computers. 9 home computers that the directors hooked up together and arranged to operate like a high end digital TV post production system. It's a home movie!

Kind of a shame it's not more popular. Made in the long-lost year of 2005.
mcity: (Default)

1. The Translation.
2. This thread.
2b. This post, highlighting that thread.

Ferrari would be a super hot chick who just stands in the center of the room and whenever anyone touches her she lights their pants on fire.

Alfa would be an incredibly beautiful woman who looks amazing and then she takes a step forward and her legs fall off.

Ford would be a good looking girl, seemingly well balanced but she cant use her phone properly so you give her a bad rating

Chevy would be girl who used to be overweight, droll and just not nice. Now shes ok.
mcity: (nolan north - }:I)

ohn Lewis Xmas - the zenith accolade to racist advertising in Britain today. Another commercail that refused to show a black family as a British family Why ?,because´╗┐ the white masses can only relate positively to the white family they see reflected back. Is the John Lewis advert racist for never allowing a black family to represented or is the great British public racist for turning over the channel when too many black faces appear?

lovely advert? - lousy psychology !
kounterfeet 2 hours ago
This proves that even when Youtube comments are smart, they're still dumb.

This also proves that people can find Unfortunate Implications on things that aren't even actually in the things; there's a wank in the comments about how John Lewis supposedly caters to high class folks.

The thing about this ad is that you can just see the people who made it patting each other on the back and´╗┐ saying, "Aren't we clever?"
AdArmand 7 hours ago
No...I really can't.
mcity: (Default)
>The Lorax trailer comes up
>blogger complains about the Implications of the last joke in it
>joke is the Lorax, who is kind of a dick, being a dick
>blogger makes all sorts of inferences about how the boy clearly just wants to get in redheads pants

The irony is that the blog in question is dedicated to the oft-neglected issue of men in feminism, but the blogger, in a fit of fanpersonism, is perfectly willing to assume a boy wanting to do something for a girl he likes=he wants to tap that.

mcity: (Default)

Dan Bull - Dear Lily [an open letter to Lily Allen]


Dan Bull - Wall Street Spirit

Me: Dan, you support Occupy Wall Street, right?
Bull: Yes.
Me: Do you agree with the idea that there should be a redress of power away from "the 1%", and towards "the 99%"?
Bull: Yes.
Me: In other words, you believe the majority should have more power than the minority.
Bull: Yes.
Me: You are aware that the people who favor abolishment of intellectual property are a vast minority?
Bull: Where are you going with this?
Me: Why aren't you answering the question?
Bull: I want to know where you're going with this.
Me: I want to know why you're not answering the question.

The idea of the abolishment of intellectual property is so laughable I can't even begin to spork it. I especially like the self-righteous, sanctimonious reasoning that not letting him send her songs to his friends loses her some fans. Because artists can pay rent with appreciation. You don't get to choose which of other people's rights they should and should not have, Dan. You give your music away for free, Dan. If someone burned it, slapped a label on, and started selling it in stores without paying you a sou, I bet your tune would change in a hurry. You couldn't even honestly sic your fans on them for some Internet justice without being a hypocrite, but I don't think self-deception troubles you overmuch.

The funny thing is, I have never heard someone say they decided copyright was bunk before they started being a pirate.

Incidentally, one of my problems with OWS is their lack of clear goals that can be agreed upon by a significant number of the movement, much less addressing means by which to achieve those goals, as well as the way their apparent desire for self-righteous martyrdom is prioritized over any desire for real reform.

This whole debate arose because of a proposed law that would lock people out of the internet after three strikes for piracy. I am ambivalent towards it, and the question of enforcing such a law seriously worries me, but that does not mean it is not well-intentioned.
mcity: (Default)

Funny thing: my reaction was exactly the same as Alex's, only a second behind.
mcity: (exclamation mark)

Assassin's Creed 2 EP1: The Life and Times of Desmond Miles - Spoiler Warning - Youtube

Spoiler Warning, in the video above, is mocking Ubisoft for making the protagonist Assassin's Creed a twenty-something white guy so most of their target audience can identify with him.

Funny thing; minority video game/comic fans say there aren't enough minorities to identify with all the time. Problem is, if you need someone to be like you to identify with them, wouldn't it be impossible for the white people to identify with anyone not-white, or cisgendered to identify with non-cis, or men to identify with women? Because I think we all know that doesn't happen. And even if it did, what makes the identification of the minority in question a greater priority than that of the majority? We're supposed to be equal here, right?

I'm not saying that it isn't a good idea to have minority characters. I'm just saying the "minority readers need to identify with them" is a terrible, terrible reason to do so. Superman is a white-collar white American with superpowers, and he is the world's most recognizable superhero. He's better known than Jesus Christ. Most of the world is not white, white-collar, American, or superpowered. As a general rule, if you can't identify with a character, and it's by accident, you have a case of plain old bad writing on your hands, not underrepresentation.
mcity: (Default)
Then I checked, and found that, yes, they really are all hot.

Then I made a post about it on my LiveJournal without a link, just to tease Srsfic.
mcity: (Default)

mcity: (Default)

TVTropes has this on the "Unfortunate Implications: Ads" page.

I'm not sure how it's an "implication" when "she's stalking him" is the premise of both the commercial and the very dark joke, but I guess you know best, TVTropes.
mcity: (Default)

I'm still not sure what route to Spain takes them through Switzerland, China, then England.

October 2012

  12 3456
21 2223242526 27


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 18th, 2017 08:30 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios