January 31, 20223 yr On 1/26/2022 at 12:40 AM, xzmattzx said: I wish the thread on the old board had been archived. I wonder how many of those predictions have come true in a short amount of time. Moving on, predict any insanity you suspect we will see from the Woke and PC crowd. Provide proof if it ever comes true. Proof should be from a fairly credible source, like an article or publication. Randos on Twitter do not count, since that is probably just some nut. But social media accounts from organizations, or from an all-too-infamous Blue Checkmark individual on Twitter, are acceptable. Eventually people will be able to marry their pets
January 31, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, paco said: I forget what movie that was from but if I remember right, he wasn't actually humping that bear
January 31, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, greend said: I forget what movie that was from but if I remember right, he wasn't actually humping that bear Super Troopers
January 31, 20223 yr On 1/26/2022 at 9:06 AM, Gannan said: Congressional and white house social media accounts will start virtue signaling by adding their preferred pronouns. Does anyone else get this on linked in? Every other time I log in, I'm asked if I want to "add my preferred pronouns to my profile". I've noticed about half of my connections there have done so. Good grief. It's not just LinkedIn. Democrats gave their pronouns on the debate stage at the primaries, a lot of politicians put it on the Twitter profiles. My company started a Diversity and Inclusion council after the George Floyd murder and protests. They have ERG's (Employee Resource Groups) for black employees, LGBTQ+ so far with plans for more. They host meetings and send out articles to all employees. A lot of people are putting their pronouns in their email signatures. A few months ago we had an all-company live webinar about trans issues from an outside vendor they paid. We're a health care company and the vendor was a health care company that specifically serves the trans community. So it wasn't just a "woke" agenda meeting but recognizing the different aspects of dealing with health care trans patients. The person leading it did a great job with a comprehensive presentation about trans issues, terminology and such. He (yes he went by he) did a good job acknowledging that these issues are new and confusing for many people that that the LGBT community lives in a bubble and more familiar with these topics but many people aren't which is a better way to discuss the topic.
January 31, 20223 yr 3 hours ago, NOTW said: I know the whole concept of no such thing as bad press and all that. Yes of course it's generating media attention and "buzz." Does that equate to more sales? I cited Nike, where some protested and boycotted while others purposely bought more to support. That was a larger issue of racial justice and Kaepernick's kneeling at the anthem and all that. Does the media buzz about this m&m's thing equate to more sales? I found an article that said m&m smaller package sales were down 4.5% in 2021 from previous year but still #2 among brands, while the medium/sharing size bag sales were up 7.7% and leading the candy market. These companies virtue signal, many of them knowing they risk losing sales to potentially offending certain groups. It's candy cartoon characters, is anyone really clamoring for more equal representation of m&m cartoons? First of all, I don't think there's a blanket rule here. Marketing candy is a different ballgame than marketing shoes. Most people don't impulse buy shoes, shoes cost a hundred times more, etc. It's one thing to say, "I'm not going to drop $150 because you support Colin Kaepernick" (although I believe sales have been up since that whole marketing stunt, which isn't particularly surprising, since Nike needs to maintain and grow a younger demo more than they need to convince old people to buy their shoes), but most people aren't going to pull the reigns back on a $1 candy purchase just because of some light virtue signaling. The purchase itself just isn't financially impactful enough to let politics (or weight-loss, will power, etc.) get in the way. But the Kaepernick example is a good one that points towards why this happens and will continue to happen. Most brands want the 18-34 year old demographic, and appealing to them is smart for future growth. Even if it has a negative effect in the short term, it's long term benefits outweigh it.
January 31, 20223 yr 26 minutes ago, NOTW said: It's not just LinkedIn. Democrats gave their pronouns on the debate stage at the primaries, a lot of politicians put it on the Twitter profiles. My company started a Diversity and Inclusion council after the George Floyd murder and protests. They have ERG's (Employee Resource Groups) for black employees, LGBTQ+ so far with plans for more. They host meetings and send out articles to all employees. A lot of people are putting their pronouns in their email signatures. A few months ago we had an all-company live webinar about trans issues from an outside vendor they paid. We're a health care company and the vendor was a health care company that specifically serves the trans community. So it wasn't just a "woke" agenda meeting but recognizing the different aspects of dealing with health care trans patients. The person leading it did a great job with a comprehensive presentation about trans issues, terminology and such. He (yes he went by he) did a good job acknowledging that these issues are new and confusing for many people that that the LGBT community lives in a bubble and more familiar with these topics but many people aren't which is a better way to discuss the topic. My company (also health care related) does some of this as well. I sit on our diversity and inclusion committee as the one straight white dude on it.
February 1, 20223 yr 7 hours ago, DiPros said: WXPN playing him during lunch. People actually listen to WXPN?
February 1, 20223 yr 7 hours ago, Gannan said: My company (also health care related) does some of this as well. I sit on our diversity and inclusion committee as the one straight white dude on it. My team reviewed the responses from people interested in the council. It read like trying to outdo each other in victim Olympics. Listing everyone they know who is a BIPOC or LGBTQ+.
February 1, 20223 yr 3 hours ago, NOTW said: My team reviewed the responses from people interested in the council. It read like trying to outdo each other in victim Olympics. Listing everyone they know who is a BIPOC or LGBTQ+. You’ll be taking the white fragility three dayer soon my friend.
February 1, 20223 yr 12 hours ago, Procus said: People actually listen to WXPN? Yes. They have some nice concerts as well. Including free ones.
February 1, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, 4for4EaglesNest said: Has Whoopi been fired yet? Dunno. You are probably the only person on this board who watches that show, you tell us
February 1, 20223 yr The problem is really the word racist, and tying all bigotry to racism. Discrimination is also not the best word. If you choose Coke over Pepsi, you are discriminating. If you talk about the races, you are a racist. Saying, white people are generally lighter skinned, is a racist statement. Probably true, but it certainly demonstrates racism and discrimination. If you talk about races being superior, or inferior, you are a bigot. If you talk about all members of a religion are evil, tainted, etc, you are a bigot.
February 1, 20223 yr Quote in Texas, where Republican state officials, including Gov. Greg Abbott, have gone as far as calling for criminal charges against any school staff member who provides children with access to young adult novels that some conservatives have labeled as "pornography.” Separately, state Rep. Matt Krause, a Republican, made a list of 850 titles dealing with racism or sexuality that might "make students feel discomfort” and demanded that Texas school districts investigate whether the books were in their libraries. The real snowflakes. "We are such pathetic whiny pieces of fecal matter, that not only can we not tolerate our child seeing the book title in the school library, we insist the books be removed so nobody else is exposed to an idea we don't like."
February 1, 20223 yr 6 minutes ago, Toastrel said: The real snowflakes. "We are such pathetic whiny pieces of fecal matter, that not only can we not tolerate our child seeing the book title in the school library, we insist the books be removed so nobody else is exposed to an idea we don't like." Lmfao, of course toaster doesn't link to the article or share the beginning: Quote KATY, Texas — From a secluded spot in her high school library, a 17-year-old girl spoke softly into her cellphone, worried that someone might overhear her say the things she’d hidden from her parents for years. They don’t know she’s queer, the student told a reporter, and given their past comments about homosexuality’s being a sin, she’s long feared they would learn her secret if they saw what she reads in the library. That space, with its endless rows of books about characters from all sorts of backgrounds, has been her "safe haven,” she said — one of the few places where she feels completely free to be herself. But books, including one of her recent favorites, have been vanishing from the shelves of Katy Independent School District libraries the past few months. Gone: "Jack of Hearts (and Other Parts),” a book she’d read last year about a gay teenager who isn’t shy about discussing his adventurous sex life. Also banished: "The Handsome Girl and Her Beautiful Boy,” "All Boys Aren’t Blue” and "Lawn Boy” — all coming-of-age stories that prominently feature LGBTQ characters and passages about sex. Some titles were removed after parents formally complained, but others were quietly banned by the district without official reviews. Toaster won't rest until high school children have access to all the LGBTQI erotica the founding fathers intended, damn it! https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-books-race-sexuality-schools-rcna13886
February 1, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, Kz! said: Lmfao, of course toaster doesn't link to the article or share the beginning: Toaster won't rest until high school children have access to all the LGBTQI erotica the founding fathers intended, damn it! https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-books-race-sexuality-schools-rcna13886 Quote Another parent in Katy, a Houston suburb, asked the district to remove a children’s biography of Michelle Obama, arguing that it promotes "reverse racism” against white people, according to the records obtained by NBC News. A parent in the Dallas suburb of Prosper wanted the school district to ban a children’s picture book about the life of Black Olympian Wilma Rudolph, because it mentions racism that Rudolph faced growing up in Tennessee in the 1940s. Texas is banning a lot more than just gay sex stuff.
February 1, 20223 yr This is all emblematic of a bigger issue, here, and it's fake news journalism. When you've got someone as elderly and handicapped as toaster, they can't distinguish real issues from clearly fake ones. They just log on to the internet through their dial-up AOL account and go to RepublicansRhitler.org and start reading the latest inconsequential outrage porn from cnbc. I mean, of course, public libraries shouldn't have fictional novels containing lgbtq erotica. They also shouldn't have random erotica of any sort. If a child wants to read that stuff, they can do it on their own dime, not the dime of the taxpayers.
February 1, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, VanHammersly said: Texas is banning a lot more than just gay sex stuff. Yes, the fake news article goes on to detail what individual parents have asked the school board to remove without even bothering to investigate whether or not their request was granted. Again, this goes back into the issue of fake news journalism. The information is presented in a way that makes midwits like Windmill here believe that Obama's book was pulled. Nope, as the article states, it was just a request from a parent, and I'm guessing since they didn't clearly state it was pulled (which would have drawn an insane amount of outrage and likely national attention) it's still on the shelves.
February 1, 20223 yr 38 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Texas is banning a lot more than just gay sex stuff. Were those ones banned or just asked to be banned?
February 1, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, Kz! said: This is all emblematic of a bigger issue, here, and it's fake news journalism. When you've got someone as elderly and handicapped as toaster, they can't distinguish real issues from clearly fake ones. They just log on to the internet through their dial-up AOL account and go to RepublicansRhitler.org and start reading the latest inconsequential outrage porn from cnbc. 1 hour ago, Kz! said: I mean, of course, public libraries shouldn't have fictional novels containing lgbtq erotica. They also shouldn't have random erotica of any sort. If a child wants to read that stuff, they can do it on their own dime, not the dime of the taxpayers. It really depends on the context and how explicit what you're talking about is. A simple line about someone talking about their sexual exploits doesn't tell you anything. There are plenty of books in every public library that describe sex acts. Tropic of Cancer, The Scarlett Letter, Catcher in the Rye and plenty of others have all been banned at various times for being too explicit and they're all available in the library now.
February 1, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Right, you have no answer because you know you got duped by the wording of the article into thinking Michelle Obama's book got pulled. 4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: It really depends on the context and how explicit what you're talking about is. A simple line about someone talking about their sexual exploits doesn't tell you anything. There are plenty of books in every public library that describe sex acts. Tropic of Cancer, The Scarlett Letter, Catcher in the Rye and plenty of others have all been banned at various times for being too explicit and they're all available in the library now. Right, so you'd actually have to go through the list of books they no longer want to see if there's any merit to pulling them. The ones they highlighted in the article seemed pretty awful, even from the sympathetic NBC writer's POV, so I highly doubt anything with much merit got pulled.
February 1, 20223 yr 7 minutes ago, Kz! said: Right, so you'd actually have to go through the list of books they no longer want to see if there's any merit to pulling them. The ones they highlighted in the article seemed pretty awful, even from the sympathetic NBC writer's POV, so I highly doubt anything with much merit got pulled. Did they? Quote about a gay teenager who isn’t shy about discussing his adventurous sex life. Needs more context. Plenty of library books feature characters that talk about their sex lives. Quote coming-of-age stories that prominently feature LGBTQ characters and passages about sex. That sounds awful? Gay characters and passages about sex. There are passages about sex in thousands of library books. That tells you almost nothing.
Create an account or sign in to comment