• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Snowflakes in action: the actual reality of "snowflakes" in the world and the consequences

The meme is deficient on its own, and instead of you admitting that
I DID "admit" that and even offered my correction, which would have obviated your butthurt condition.
Too little too late to save you from your butthurt, but I really don't think your complaints deserve more.

the True Meaning--as divined by you--is wicked and false

Yah sure. In your opinion. I think almost everything that you right wingers post here is wicked and false, and unlike you, I am able to say what is wicked and false about them.
 
Yah sure. In your opinion. I think almost everything that you right wingers post here is wicked and false, and unlike you, I am able to say what is wicked and false about them.
It is wicked and false to say the only reason someone would object to certain reading material in a children's library is because the person wants to repeat the atrocities in the reading material.
 
Yah sure. In your opinion. I think almost everything that you right wingers post here is wicked and false, and unlike you, I am able to say what is wicked and false about them.
It is wicked and false to say the only reason someone would object to certain reading material in a children's library is because the person wants to repeat the atrocities in the reading material.
By what principles?
 
A minute ago you were talking about the meaning, now back to being hung up on syntax. How quickly they forget.

I should have known. The butthurt is from “the only”, which is syntax that a nine year old would use, perhaps not knowing how to quantify the portion of an accurately described segment of the total population in the space available in meme format.

Allow me to clean it up and make it more literal. Bold added where modified.
It is not wicked and false to say that a reason someone would object to certain reading material in a children's library is because the person wants to repeat the atrocities in the reading material.
Now you troothin.
Not that there are creeps like that out there, but if there are, they probably would like to do it again.
 
Last edited:
Yah sure. In your opinion. I think almost everything that you right wingers post here is wicked and false, and unlike you, I am able to say what is wicked and false about them.
It is wicked and false to say the only reason someone would object to certain reading material in a children's library is because the person wants to repeat the atrocities in the reading material.
By what principles?
It is false because there are reasons, other than 'I want to repeat atrocities', that are possible. One of those reasons is 'this is not age appropriate'. Another is 'it is unpleasant and distressing to read'.

It is wicked because it makes a false claim, and the false claim is a racist claim about the moral virtue and atrocity-predispositions of white people.
 
false claim
So, making a claim that is (slightly) false, even when you are a child, and as such not expected to express a completely coherent idea, and in a format wherein expressing completely coherent ideas is not expected, is evil and wicked?

I guess that makes McConnell evil and wicked...
 
It is false because there are reasons, other than 'I want to repeat atrocities', that are possible.
How many times do I have to agree. “The only” was a bad choice, and in polite company an adult could only point out that it’s “a” reason?

But it’s a meme, so … butthurt about only can make you so lonely you write a new hit country song 🎵 🎶

Judging it to be evil is a bit too much for me. Take it to your god or whoever convinced you there was one.
 
So, making a claim that is (slightly) false,
The claim is false. There's no 'slightly' about it. I am talking about the True Meaning, as divined by Prophet Elixir and Prophetess Rhea, and conveyed to me. It is false that the only reason white people could object to materials about atrocities committed by white people in a school library is because those white people want to commit the same atrocities. There are a number of other reasons a white person could object, some of which I have explicated.

even when you are a child, and as such not expected to express a completely coherent idea, and in a format wherein expressing completely coherent ideas is not expected, is evil and wicked?
As should be very clear by now, I do not believe the Antiracist Childlike Empress uttered the quoted words in the first place. The entire thing reeks of fakeness.

As should also be very clear, the words quoted have a plain meaning that is ludicrous, but I'm not talking about the plain meaning any more. The True Meaning (which is already a generous, charitable "reading" of the actual text) is false, and it is a falsity that is also racist.

The promotion of this meme by adults who ought know better is the pathway to the realisation of the evil and wicked True Meaning. The promotion in breathtaking, gushing, obsequious praise, like Elixir did by introducing it and calling the child 'precocious', like you did with your foreword to the child's hagiography, like everyone who mindlessly 'liked' the post, and like laughing dog who thought I thought it was fake because the words were too sophisticated.

The plain words of the quote are ridiculous and wicked. The True Meaning is not conveyed by the text, and in any case is also wicked and false, but slightly less wicked than the plain meaning.

That you and others wish to promote the True Meaning means you are either promoting wickedness, or you are recklessly indifferent to the consequences of your sloppy and prejudiced thinking.

 
Just for a change of pace, let’s watch Meta lose it because there aren’t REAL cats voting to ban books.
And nobody ever says “say meow” to approve motions in school board meetings.

1643756909654.png

And bear in mind, Meta, if you don’t appreciate the gravity of the current Nazi threat, not only are you being evil by negligence, but aggravated evil, now that you are advised that the overall trend of which book banning is but a small part, is a trend down the road to Nazi authoritarianism. Or perdition, hell, whatever it is, it’s evil evil evil. And wickedness. Don’t forget wickedness.
So there.
 
Last edited:
The claim is false. There's no 'slightly' about it. I am talking about the True Meaning, as divined by Prophet Elixir and Prophetess Rhea, and conveyed to me. It is false that the only reason white people could object to materials about atrocities committed by white people in a school library is because those white people want to commit the same atrocities. There are a number of other reasons a white person could object, some of which I have explicated
Then let's look at the behavior:

Winnie the Pooh has a naked bear? Fine.

Maus has naked mice? OH THE HORROR!

It strikes me that the real reason is not actually the nakedness as much as the fact that it teaches children that the Holocaust was bad.

But I'm not allowed to impute intent.

Only Metaphor is allowed to impute intent.

Keep apologizing for those people who want to prevent teaching the Holocaust.
 
Only Metaphor is allowed to impute intent

Nah he’s kinda libertarian. Anyone can impute intent. And anyone is allowed to hold to a belief that only what they impute is correct.
 
Then let's look at the behavior:

Winnie the Pooh has a naked bear? Fine.

Maus has naked mice? OH THE HORROR!

It strikes me that the real reason is not actually the nakedness as much as the fact that it teaches children that the Holocaust was bad.

But I'm not allowed to impute intent.

Only Metaphor is allowed to impute intent.

Keep apologizing for those people who want to prevent teaching the Holocaust.
I have not once, here or anywhere, discussed the book Maus, or even heard of it before this week.

Now, if you feel shame or regret for endorsing a frankly idiotic meme, I'm not going to harp on it, but I do wish you would stop pretending I have said things I haven't said and endorsed things I have not endorsed.
 
Oh, sweet. We’re back on topic.

so there is a specific cabal of whining self indulgent shit posters on this forum who have spent at least the last 8 years spamming our board with their pearl clutching anal-fingering crying about 'snowflakes' and 'safe spaces' and how liberals are a bunch of soft-skinned cry babies.
and for that entire time i've laughed at how pathetic those posters are for their level of outrage juxtaposed against:
A. such an insanely minimal issue, such as college campuses having a single room for women to hang out in without dealing with men,
B. the fact that when it comes to thin-skinned cry baby "snowflake" material the right has that market cornered entirely and always has.

Another is 'it is unpleasant and distressing to read'.
 
Question: if there are science books in school libraries which contain obsolete or incomplete information that has since been found to be lacking or incomplete or just plain incorrect, should those books remain in use in libraries? Or should they be removed and replaced with more accurate science books?

What should happen to the incorrect books?

How is that different from other books which have outdated or disproven theories or ideas about peoples or history or sociology or psychology?

What if there were books that discussed homosexuality as a mental illness? Should those books still be available to students?
 
Question: if there are science books in school libraries which contain obsolete or incomplete information that has since been found to be lacking or incomplete or just plain incorrect, should those books remain in use in libraries? Or should they be removed and replaced with more accurate science books?
What should happen to the incorrect books?

How is that different from other books which have outdated or disproven theories or ideas about peoples or history or sociology or psychology?
Who is this question aimed at?
 
Question: if there are science books in school libraries which contain obsolete or incomplete information that has since been found to be lacking or incomplete or just plain incorrect, should those books remain in use in libraries? Or should they be removed and replaced with more accurate science books?
What should happen to the incorrect books?

How is that different from other books which have outdated or disproven theories or ideas about peoples or history or sociology or psychology?
Who is this question aimed at?
It’s a general question.

Anybody can answer.
 
Question: if there are science books in school libraries which contain obsolete or incomplete information that has since been found to be lacking or incomplete or just plain incorrect, should those books remain in use in libraries? Or should they be removed and replaced with more accurate science books?
What should happen to the incorrect books?

How is that different from other books which have outdated or disproven theories or ideas about peoples or history or sociology or psychology?
Who is this question aimed at?
It’s a general question.

Anybody can answer.
Non-fiction books that are no longer relevant or accurate can be retired from library stock, unless they have historical value. This would usually mean selling them. It would be unusual to burn them on a ritual bonfire in the name of atonement.

Fiction books are art, and art has no truth-value in the same way non-fiction does. If, for some reason, fiction books were to be retired, it would also be prudent to sell them.
 
Back
Top Bottom