Wednesday, February 28, 2018
Saturday, July 10, 2010
They managed to find my blog. Unsurprisingly, they're criticizing my post, but that actually makes me laugh. Why? Instead of stating why I was wrong, they keep using Ad Hominems and never actually argue my positions, my favorite being "pour some slaw and vinegar on yourself," which isn't even that great of an insult to begin with. Today, I will do the opposite of that, because I know how to debate pretty well. There is even a new claim made that is, yet again, flawed and just plain dumb, but I'll get to that later.
Anyway, I'm not making this post specifically to argue with them, since I can tell they're the kind of people who won't admit when they're wrong and will go on forever with their bull shit. It's an attitude that's not hard to spot once you get into enough arguments and debates. I'm making this post as an addendum to further prove their stupidity, and to show that they're putting words in my mouth.
For instance, let's start with this:
"Advocating rape and bashing gays? Gotta love the utterly ridiculous strawmen RHMH's pinching out."
"(S)He's got me bashing gays and even advocating rape!"
That first comment was made by a member named Robert, and the second was made by DolFan316. I'll show you what I initially said to prove what I said are not Straw Men, starting with the gay bashing thing:
"But seriously, gays in the military? Fuck, that's the choice with the second highest number of votes, which proves even more how fucking biased the people on this site are. What is the problem with gays in the military? It limits people's rights. You can be openly straight in the military, but not gay (unless you're closeted)? There's obviously something wrong with that. But people are concerned in the first place because they believe a straight person is going to have his personal space interfered with if a gay person tries to come on to the straight person. You know, like they're sexual deviants who are always horny, and straight people aren't. If you're even somewhat smart, you can figure out why this is incredibly fucking moronic. And quite frankly, I'm offended that option is even a choice that can be made on the site, since people like me might want to go there in the first place, but it has one hundred and fifty three votes. That's fucking insane."
I don't know about you, but I don't see anything in there that calls them gay bashers. What I will admit to is the fact that one hundred and fifty four (one more than last time) aren't supporting gay rights. This isn't true for everyone, but usually people who don't support gays in the military don't support other areas of LGBT rights. Considering I am a lesbian, I was offended by that, and I deserve to be since I'm part of that demographic they wouldn't support in the military. As for the advocating rape thing:
"I have never seen or overheard a Conservative change his/her mind about much of anything. In fact, I often hear them going to extremes by saying ridiculous bullshit just to try and keep the argument going, and they usually do this when they show (sometimes even quite small) signs that they're losing. For example (and I'm basing this on an argument that I've heard before, but there were many more quotes similar to it), if you argue with a conservative Christian, and prove to them that the Bible promotes rape (especially to women, because the Bible is also quite misogynistic), they might say something like, "That's for women who sin. It doesn't advocate raping innocent women. Women who have sinned deserve to be raped." This is obviously ridiculous. I am a woman, so I would be deeply offended if someone actually said this, partly because their view of what a sin is and isn't is ambiguous (which means if that person thought being gay is a sin, then I would apparently deserve to be raped), but mostly because rape shouldn't be condoned fucking ever."
I was generalizing Conservatives, sure, but I really do see this so often to the point where I am able to do that. However, I made no mention of DolFan316 or any of these people specifically supporting rape. I was simply quoting from several arguments I've had with various Christian Conservatives, and I was ranting about Conservatives in general, because they tend to piss me off. I did not claim that the people on Bone the Fish advocated rape, yet they claim I did. After reading this and properly understanding this, it's obvious I didn't even want to make that connection at all.
And while I'm on the subject of Conservatives:
"Instead of hurting my feelings I find it absolutely hilarious! Especially since this blogger actually came back here just to read the posts AGAIN after having already declared massive hatred and rage at us conservatives."
Another quote by DolFan316. Just to clarify, I have no hatred of Conservatives. I think, in general, they tend to spew bull shit, but I don't hate them, since there are smart Conservatives out there, Dennis Miller and Shep Smith being good examples. I also had a History teacher in college who was pretty smart and fair in his views, even though there were a couple that I didn't agree with.
Also, I only came back after a long while because I was hoping the site would've changed, and to see what I might've missed, because the site is interesting otherwise. As for this time, I Googled my name, which I use to find my blog and log in, so I saw myself getting talked about on Bone the Fish even before I clicked on the link.
Now let's move on to this:
"Chubby rain is amused that his IMDB story was touted as a reason that Dolfan is an idiot for believing him."
"So if I'm the main one mentioned by name, does that make me the leader of the gang?"
First quote is by Chubby Rain, and the second is by DolFan316 (again). Here's what I wrote that made Chubby Rain post that, and also a correction on my initial view of DolFan316, which they seemed to overlook:
"(so it's not just DolFan316, and I may have been wrong about him being the biggest Conservative guy, but he's still the dumbest, particularly for trusting what a user named ChubbyRain said about IMDB just because he was the guy who said it, which means he'll trust anything he says)"
Here's what DolFan316 said that made me post that in the first place:
"Wow...if what Chubbyrain says is true than IMDB is right up there with Wal Mart, TV Guide and Al Queda in the pantheon of evil organizations."
The subject is not to question Chubby Rain's story, but he seems to accept it without question just because he said it, thus is why I deduced that he was the dumbest member.
Now I'll admit, I initially misread his post, so it is questionable that he just goes and trusts anything Chubby Rain says, but that post does still gives that vibe, and seems like he would trust him anyway, especially because you can tell that he's been easily brainwashed.
Even after disregarding that, there's still this dumb comment:
"Nope. PC is strictly a liberal concept. Don't lump conservatives into it when they just want people to stop acting like gangsta wannabes and destroying America from the inside."
He generalizes Conservatives worse than I tend to, and Liberals are certainly not the only people that use Political Correctness (proves more of his obvious extremely Conservative bias), but that's not the big problem. He states that Conservatives want people to limit their own freedoms by not acting like gangsta wannabees (the "destroying America from the inside" part is vague). Wanting people to not act like gangsta wannabes to the point where you want to stop it, as long as they're not limiting the rights of others in the process, is a freedom-limiting, unconstitutional, and Authoritarian viewpoint.
Now before I get on to my last criticism, I'd like to point one other thing out, so this next criticism makes sense:
They posted that as a site that claimed they were too Liberal, or something along those lines. However, I see nothing on the site that says or even hints at anything of the sort. This is all the article says about the site:
"I believe that shows tend to “jump the shark” around the middle of season two. Bonethefish.com, the successor to the original Jumptheshark website, lists Ellen’s arrival as only the eighth biggest reason the show jumped, and makes no mention of her sexual orientation. Indeed, the major reason the site lists for the show tanking is that it “sucked from the start” and was never worth watching."
What part of that says these people are "too Liberal," or anything of the sort?
Anyway, here's the last thing I'm going to criticize; the stupid claim I noted earlier:
"Bone the Fish is both too liberal and too conservative? What a paradox! IMHO, if you're accused of being too liberal by one group and too conservative by another, then it proves you're neither. Could these paradoxal accusations prove that BTF is...BALANCED?"
I can prove why this is a stupid claim just by looking at the page this comment was posted on, and it's not by analyzing their comments. Look at the reasons section for this page (the Bone the Fish page posted above, if any of you readers are lost here). Look at some of those reasons:
"Liberal Vote Stuffing: Everything liberal never boned? Yeah right!"
That right there is a Conservative bias. I have looked everywhere on the site, and have seen not one page, other than the page for Fox News and this one, that claims there is a Conservative bias, and that's why the show sucks (it's obvious Fox News has a Conservative bias anyway). There are also two other reasons stating the ridiculous political arguments, which is obvious regardless of whether you see a bias or not, but then there's another reason that also proves a Conservative bias is apparent:
"Fox Newsification: Accusations of "liberal agenda" or "anti-American" (The rest of the reason why is not able to be seen)"
That means that even other members on the site who don't have this Conservative bias are completely aware that there is one in the reasons for why things suck or Boned the Fish/Jumped the Shark. I know that's an Appeal to Popularity or something similar, so I'll justify that by saying this: if you look around enough, you'll see it. It's not hard to find, since it's on several pages, including this one. A bunch of pages bitching about a Liberal bias, and rarely any about a Conservative bias. Even if a reason doesn't specifically state anything about a Liberal bias, there is still usually a reason made with some kind of Conservative bias, or you can tell otherwise that the reason was indeed stated by a Conservative. If you want a little proof out of a lot, here's something interesting:
There's obviously a pattern there, and that's why I noted the site's Conservative bias in the first place (besides the users responsible, obviously). Now sure, people who are on neither side of the spectrum can claim something has a bias (for instance, anyone who isn't strongly Conservative can clearly see Fox News and Bone the Fish as having an extreme bias), but only people on the far side of one can complain of even the slightest bias like these people on Bone the Fish do constantly. And, of course, they don't usually go into their reasons why, but they sure do bitch about it a lot.
And I'll add this just in case:
Before anyone, whether it be a member of Bone the Fish or somebody else reading my blog out there, criticize me of Cherry-Picking, I'll just quickly let you know that I only did quote the most important things that they had said enough to prove my point. Anything left out is meaningless or Ad Hominem attacks, so they weren't necessary to post here.
So now that I have all of that taken care of, I'm done with that site. And hey, thanks for giving me more publicity as well. ;)
EDIT: First off, I figured out why they thought that article claimed they were "too Liberal." It's apparently because of that site saying they were tolerant of gays. Why that translates to "too Liberal," I don't know, but that just makes it clear to me even more than with the gays in the military thing that whoever wrote and whoever agrees with that doesn't support gay rights, which translates to more reason for me not to join the site, and also shows how extreme their Conservative values are.
That's quite a mature reaction to criticism, isn't it? Let's make a page dedicated to hating someone who criticized us, regardless of how well-founded the criticism was. (By the way, "Red Not Blonde: What metal heads have red hair?" is a pretty lame and dumb reason reason to actually dislike something)
I happened to figure out that they made a whole page about me, which really got me laughing, partly because they're stereotyping a lot of shit, like thinking everything is too Conservative. As much as I complain about Conservatives, I don't claim everything is Conservative, nor bitch every time something is, like they do whenever something is even slightly Liberal.
For instance, they said I complained that TVTropes (which I never even mentioned before, and after looking at it, seems like a better site), and that Retro Junk was too Conservative. Here's the whole post on that again:
"And I figured I'd mention this since I've been talking about forums and stuff. For a short while, my girlfriend and I went to the site Retro Junk and posted a bit there. It's not a bad site, but we ultimately left because of the number of trolls there (that's why my girlfriend left, since she hates dealing with that shit at all) and the shape of the forum in general. Seriously, it's quite a mess, and keeping up with it all can be a bit aggravating and confusing, mostly because of the large number of boards there. So if any members there are reading this, that's why we left. Otherwise, most of you were cool people, and the site has great content otherwise, so my girlfriend and I still keep track of the articles and stuff. But it's just not really worth being an active member there. So basically, if you're new to Retro Junk, don't join unless you want to become active and write articles and all of that, but I'd still recommend the site just for the amount of content alone and the quality (at least for the most part) of the site. So, Retro Junk, reorganize the site and crack down harder on the trolls, and we may return, and you may also grab more members in the process."
That's all I wrote about it: trolls and the messy board setup. Did I mention Conservatism at all in that whole paragraph? No.
And besides, I actually do think a bit Conservatively. I think we should definitely keep to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights for instance. That's a Conservative viewpoint I actually agree with. Well, it also happens to be a Liberal viewpoint, but in terms of living in this country, it can also be considered Conservative.
As for that "pot calling the kettle black" comment, it's not really a big deal who has more members. I've never claimed that I've been trying to get more members; I ultimately don't care since this blog is a good way for me to get my thoughts out of my head anyway. These people on Bone the Fish, however, are indeed looking for more, so I figured I'd give them advice (all it is, so they can do what they want regardless), which didn't surprise me at all that they didn't take.
And just to clarify, I have actually criticized women who fake lesbianism to get attention in the past.
"Speaking of which, what actually grinds my gears is the women who pretend to be lesbians just to attract men. You might be able to grab their attention (if they're actually into that kind of thing), but what if they actually thought you're a lesbian? That approach might not work because they'd think that you're just into women. It's just like a skit I saw on Mad TV where two guys were pretending to be in a gay relationship just to get girls, but they just stayed friends with them for a couple of decades because the girls actually believed that they were gay. Besides that point, why would you want to go kiss someone other than the person you want to be with? Why not simply go up to the person you want to hang out with? What's preventing you from doing so?"
I'd have to be a complete hypocrite to do just that.
Also, I certainly don't hate every Bone the Fish member. I don't hate anything, but I dislike the people that have been putting this bull shit on me and the things that I have criticized in the past. If you don't hold these extremely Conservative viewpoints, don't put a bunch of ridiculous stereotypes on others, and don't put words in other people's mouth, you're still cool in my eyes, because if these people weren't around, this site would be excellent with you still there, because it has an interesting setup and is an overall great idea.
And no, I'm not looking for a rise out of anyone. I was bullied throughout my life, so I'm not that kind of person. I have better things to do with my time than to rile anyone up, and even if I wanted to, I'd tackle a site with more members if I really cared to get more people to look at my blog. All I was wanting to do was make criticism towards something. Whether these certain members on Bone the Fish replied or not, or figured out about my post or not, didn't matter to me.
And now I'm actually done. For sure. I hope anyone reading out there realizes the truth about these people and their bull shit. And please, if you must, ask me first. Don't turn to these assholes for the truth, because they manipulate it, and I've proven it.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
I must reiterate again, I am not a big fan of Obama, but he is not at all comparable to Hitler. Neither was Bush, but even that made more sense since they were both Right-Wing Authoritarians (Obama is a Left-Winger), but those comparisons still don't work. Stalin would make more sense in comparison to Obama, but even that's pushing it pretty far. Anyway, I do agree with the reason given about how he's dealing with taxes. That's obviously a stupid idea that he had. I also don't think sending more troops overseas was the best idea, either. If anything, we have terrorists here, and we need to deal with them right now, if anything, not the ones overseas.
But a lot of the other stuff on this page, not just in the comments, but the reasons, is fucking ridiculous. Even the top reason is stupid, because that wasn't even Obama's decision (although he did accept it). But seriously, gays in the military? Fuck, that's the choice with the second highest number of votes, which proves even more how fucking biased the people on this site are. What is the problem with gays in the military? It limits people's rights. You can be openly straight in the military, but not gay (unless you're closeted)? There's obviously something wrong with that. But people are concerned in the first place because they believe a straight person is going to have his personal space interfered with if a gay person tries to come on to the straight person. You know, like they're sexual deviants who are always horny, and straight people aren't. If you're even somewhat smart, you can figure out why this is incredibly fucking moronic (like The Onion, who wrote a great satirical article here: http://www.theonion.com/articles/repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-paves-way-for-gay-sex,17698/). And quite frankly, I'm offended that option is even a choice that can be made on the site, since people like me might want to go there in the first place, but it has one hundred and fifty three votes. That's fucking insane.
And then there's issue with Fox News. Do I think it's ultimately appropriate for the Obama administration to go after Fox News like that? Not really. However, I'm giving them leeway on this because they simply stated that Fox News isn't a news network and shouldn't be trusted. And they're right. I don't normally trust or agree with anything or everything the government says to the public, but they are absolutely right about this. Fox News, and this is evident if you watch their network, is ultimately a propaganda network (for the most part, at least) successfully getting their viewpoints out to the public at large, and this is evident by the fact that they tend to associate themselves with various things fitting their viewpoints, most notably the Tea Party movement, otherwise known as the Tea Bagger's movement (love that name). News networks do not and should not do that (unless it's a legitimate charity or something). If one of them does, it should be questioned for sure.
Speaking of which, I know MSNBC isn't the best news network to be watching, either, so I don't. Well, except for Rachel Maddow, she's awesome, because she's calm, rational and logical, and even admits when she makes mistakes. But even if you were to call that network biased, which it definitely can be, it's bias is nowhere near the level of Fox News, and it's quite apparent whenever you talk to someone who actually watches the network. If you watch the network and talk or argue with a couple of people who watch it, it'll be obvious to you just how bad the bias is and how it's influencing the people, especially since it's the most watched news network out of the three major news networks (source removed; dead link). It'll even be obvious when the person you're talking to watches Fox News. Best way to recognize it is if the people you're talking to are talking like these dickheads on Bone the Fish.
And I hope to something that they're not the ones that run the site. That's the only thing keeping me from going there. That and the high amount of people against gays being in the military, which isn't a good sign. So until more people come in to correct the balance of viewpoints, or once these fuckers finally stop going to the site, that's when I might join. Otherwise, I'm staying far away from the place at the moment, other than just looking at the votes and stuff.
And if you look at the TVTropes page, it seems they're still trying to get the word out about their site, despite the fact that their website is featured on the Jumping the Shark page on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_Shark). Seriously, they're still lacking in members (or at least people posting) even after being featured on a page on Wikipedia, which I'm sure is seen fairly often since "Jumping the Shark" is a popular term. So, considering you still are lacking in activity despite being featured on Wikipedia, here's some advice, guys: stop with your opinionated, brainwashed (I can easily tell you are), extremely Conservative bull shit, or at least tone it way down. Also, stop acting like what you're saying is gospel or true. It's quite obvious to me and everyone else I know who has seen the site (I've shown it to them, and it's a fairly large group of people even including soft Conservatives) that people like you, the ultra Conservatives, are the site's biggest cancer by a long shot, and that we and many others would join if that element wasn't present otherwise. If you take my advice to heart, I'm sure you'll get more members.
And I figured I'd mention this since I've been talking about forums and stuff. For a short while, my girlfriend and I went to the site Retro Junk and posted a bit there. It's not a bad site, but we ultimately left because of the number of trolls there (that's why my girlfriend left, since she hates dealing with that shit at all) and the shape of the forum in general. Seriously, it's quite a mess, and keeping up with it all can be a bit aggravating and confusing, mostly because of the large number of boards there. So if any members there are reading this, that's why we left. Otherwise, most of you were cool people, and the site has great content otherwise, so my girlfriend and I still keep track of the articles and stuff. But it's just not really worth being an active member there. So basically, if you're new to Retro Junk, don't join unless you want to become active and write articles and all of that, but I'd still recommend the site just for the amount of content alone and the quality (at least for the most part) of the site. So, Retro Junk, reorganize the site and crack down harder on the trolls, and we may return, and you may also grab more members in the process.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Bone the Fish is actually an interesting website that talks about "jump the shark" moments, not just in TV shows, but also movies, celebrities, and even random stuff, like sports teams and businesses.
That's all that I was basically going to post, but I noticed one major problem, and I feel like posting about it because it needs to be said by somebody. At first, I thought most everyone on the site was an idiot. The reason was because I kept seeing an extreme Conservative bias (which isn't hard to spot) in some of the reasons shows were disliked, and the like. For several shows, I'd see a reason for a show jumping the shark, "Liberal agenda" or some shit like that. First off, that's not a jump the shark moment, that's just some guy who disagrees with the views on the show. Second, some of the shows with a so-called "Liberal bias" really don't have one, and if they do, you can easily tell that it's light to the point where it shouldn't automatically ruin a show, especially if the show has other merits that far outweigh any shortcomings, and I don't consider a sometimes nonexistent "Liberal bias" a shortcoming.
However, I later learned that it was just a few incredibly stupid users, one of particular note being a member named DolFan316, though he's certainly not the only one. I picked him because he, at least from what I've read, was the most outspoken and the overall dumbest of them all. Also, he seems to be responsible for most of the Conservative bias in the reasons a show jumped the shark or sucked because he often comments on the shows that list them. Just read some of this guy's/girl's responses:
You can tell that he has his head shoved so far up Conservatism's ass he can barely see or hear anything else from inside. He constantly complains of Liberal biases and that Liberals are sheep. This is ironic considering Liberals think the same thing of Conservatives. It's immature, really. I don't consider myself either one, but I do lean more towards Liberalism considering Conservatism is a lot more freedom-limiting. Hell, I more than have the right to hate Conservatives: they and Christians are the reason I can't get married, and they're both often synonymous with each other. For this guy, it seems to be no different.
But that's not all of my bad experience with Conservatives. I have never seen or overheard a Conservative change his/her mind about much of anything. In fact, I often hear them going to extremes by saying ridiculous bullshit just to try and keep the argument going, and they usually do this when they show (sometimes even quite small) signs that they're losing. For example (and I'm basing this on an argument that I've heard before, but there were many more quotes similar to it), if you argue with a conservative Christian, and prove to them that the Bible promotes rape (especially to women, because the Bible is also quite misogynistic), they might say something like, "That's for women who sin. It doesn't advocate raping innocent women. Women who have sinned deserve to be raped." This is obviously ridiculous. I am a woman, so I would be deeply offended if someone actually said this, partly because their view of what a sin is and isn't is ambiguous (which means if that person thought being gay is a sin, then I would apparently deserve to be raped), but mostly because rape shouldn't be condoned fucking ever.
Of course, because of this, I've never met a Conservative that knew how to argue well, but nonetheless are often ignorant and continue to believe in stuff that's "inconvenient" for them to believe in, even if what they argue for has been proven 100% false. It's like some kind of drug affecting a stimulus in their brain and they have a hard time quitting. It's not a good knowledge-seeking way to think and argue. I am a knowledge-seeker, so when I admit that I'm wrong, I often take that as a learning experience. The Conservatives I've seen don't do that. They're so ingrained with being right (no pun intended) that they'll even manipulate they're own opinions just for the chance at winning the argument instead of ultimately being right (again, no pun intended).
But getting back to DolFan316, here's my favorite quote of his, posted on the topic "Political Correctness":
"Political correctness is the biggest threat to free speech America has ever faced. It's straight out of George Orwell's 1984 novel. And it was invented by liberals!"
That's my favorite quote because it's so fucking misguided, and it proves just how incredibly brainwashed he is. It made me laugh so hard I was literally rolling on the floor laughing. Why was I laughing, though? It's because this guy doesn't get the point of 1984. If anything, George Orwell considered himself a Democratic Socialist, and Democratic Socialists are people that Conservatives usually don't like. This is ironic, considering this Conservative in particular is quoting a book by a Democratic Socialist to try and support what the novel was initially against: Totalitarianism and Fascism.
Besides that, he's just pulling that "Political Correctness was invented by Liberals" bullshit out of his ass. I don't know who it was really invented by, but he obviously doesn't know, either.
Lastly, DolFan316 apparently really likes Sean Hannity. Sean...Fucking...Hannity! Seriously, 'Nuff said.
P.S. I figured out he has a YouTube account. Two comments claimed he was an asshole, one gave a reason, one didn't. The one that gave a reason said that he commented rudely on someone's misspelling.
I'm honestly not surprised.
P.S.S. I also wanted to show a ripoff of Wikipedia called Conservapedia. It's been criticized by almost everybody except for some Conservatives themselves. If you read some of the shit on the site, you'll quickly see why.
Here are excerpts from Wikipedia on Conservapedia:
In April 2007, Peter Lipson, a doctor of internal medicine, attempted to edit the article on breast cancer to include evidence against Conservapedia's statement naming abortion as a major cause of the disease, but found his medical credentials being questioned by Schlafly and other Conservapedia administrators, all of whom ended the debate by deleting Lipson's edits and blocking Lipson's account. Several editors, including Lipson, started another website, RationalWiki, which offers criticism of and satirical articles about Conservapedia, its administrators, and the Conservative Christian viewpoint which it promotes. According to an article published in the LA Times in 2007, "From there, they (Lipson and his fellow editors) monitor Conservapedia. And—by their own admission—engage in acts of cyber-vandalism."