She didn’t cancel the talk because she was threatened, you understand. She was still going to speak.
But she asked for protection against someone who claimed he was going to open fire on her and Utah law prevented police from patting down attendees at the event.
So a guy (I’m assuming it was a guy) threatens to shoot her and the police can’t even stop anyone from carrying a gun to her talk. Because the right to carry a firearm wherever the fuck you want is more important than the right to keep people with firearms out of a place where someone has threatened to kill people with a firearm.
And spare me the good guy with the gun/bad guy with a gun thing. If the bad guy with a gun gets into the event, he (again I’m assuming it is a guy) will be able to kill his target before anyone kills him. And that’s all he cares about.
So best case scenario is this asshole (who was probably making empty threats but they still worked) would have died after accomplishing his stated goal. Which is what he expected would happen anyway. Great solution, Utah!
Please note that I’m not talking about Gamergate for a few reasons. First, it has been talked to death and the people doing most of the talking are assholes who don’t deserve my time.
And second, we need to stop naming every scandal after Watergate. It is just so completely unoriginal. Have you guys heard of the Teapot Dome Scandal? That’s a great name for a scandal! Now everything is NounGate.
Nixon is dead, folks. We need to move on.
An appeals court had to overturn this idiotic ruling so I guess sometimes the judicial system works. Eventually.
If we are to believe this “irrational” mother’s story, she chose to give her child her own last name after the father abused her during the pregnancy. The judge in the case felt that she just wasn’t in the right mind to make that sort of decision and, I guess, thought it would case harm to the child if the child didn’t have his father’s last name.
An appeals court saw it differently and apparently felt the judge in the case was far more irrational than the mother.
This last name thing is problematic to begin with. I like my last name so when I got married, I kept it. That’s totally fine because I’m a dude and nobody questions when a man wants to keep his name.
Nobody questions when parents given their child the father’s last name.
But if a woman wants to keep her last name or give her last name to a child, well then it is time to take the case to court, I guess.
It’s a double standard. And a stupid one.
Worst marketing campaign ever.
Does anyone get the idea that pretending you are going to release nude pictures of someone is only slightly better than saying you are going to do it for real? Even If you follow your threat up with “ha-ha, we were just kidding! Those 4chan people are pretty awful, aren’t they?”
Well yeah. Some of them are.
You just defined yourself as more awful because you are pretending to be awful to show how awful you believe others to be. Which is just dumb.
In the meantime, you make Emma Watson, who had some really important things to say, feel vulnerable. Maybe you contacted her publicist to tell her that she shouldn’t worry and you didn’t really have nude pictures of Emma and even if you did, you weren’t going to post them because you were just sticking it to 4chan ha ha!
What did Rantic Marketing manage to do? They managed to make 4chan look really good. Talk about a complete failure.
PS: Do you really think that shutting down one bunch of assholes on the internet will get rid of assholes on the internet? How long have you been here????
Almost Everything About the Adrian Peterson Story
First, I’m upset that this entire story is turning into a question of what parents are “allowed” to do to discipline their child.
Look, it doesn’t matter. Peterson hit a four year old with a switch until the kid bled. That is beyond discipline.
Also, the kid is four. Cognitively he doesn’t have the ability to fully connect the beating with the behavior that caused it. He may understand that he is being punished for something but he doesn’t know what caused the punishment. So he wasn’t “disciplined,” he was just “punished.” And in his mind the punishment was basically for the simple act of existing.
Then you have people like this guy writing articles about how spanking their kid is A-OK and, in fact, common sense (it isn’t). This is not a case of simple spanking. I don’t agree with him in any case (and my friend Levi Weinhagen makes good arguments as to why) but it isn’t the same thing so why even write the article?
Peterson’s mom says that the discipline used on Peterson must have been OK because look how he turned out.
Yeah, he turned out to be a great running back. Who has fathered several children by several different mothers and allegedly beat the crap out of (at least) one of those kids. If you think your discipline choices didn’t have a negative impact on your son, lady, you might need a better idea of what “negative impact” means.
And of course you have the NFL and the Vikings, who only suspended Peterson when he became more of a PR liability than he had previously been a benefit.
They shouldn’t be waiting to see how the public will react. They should be anticipating that reaction. In the wake of the Ray Rice video, it shouldn’t have been too difficult to figure out what was going to happen.
The problem is that there is a dialogue focused on whether or not Lawrence (and other celebrities) are to blame for the theft of their personal pictures.
Well let’s stop and think about this for a mom…NO!
I am writing this blog post on a laptop computer that is valuable. Now you, the reader, know I have a laptop computer you could sell for money. If you came over to my house, broke in and stole my computer would it be my fault because I made you aware that I owned it?
NO! That’s what we call theft! There are all sorts of laws about that shit.
It is not my fault for owning a computer any more that it is Lawrence’s fault that she owned nude photographs of herself (if indeed those are photographs of her – which she denies).
Theft is a crime. Owning things people want to steal is not.
I think we all get that standards of attractiveness/beauty are messed up in the fashion world. Here, you can see how much work went into taking someone who looked fine and creating a lie about her body.
What is most upsetting is the company’s apology. In essence they used the “everybody does it” argument. They took down the photoshopped picture but they didn’t put up the original picture to replace it.
Then they admitted that they made the changes to sell a product.
Well that’s honest, I guess. What they fail to recognize is the product they are selling when they do something like that.
They are no longer selling swimwear. They are selling body image. They are telling young women who look like Meghan Kausman that they aren’t thin enough to wear this product. Their apology indicates that they are completely OK with that.
I know (and I hope most of us do) that advertising is inherently dishonest. Fruit Loops have never been a healthy addition to a balanced breakfast. Pick up trucks don’t have great gas mileage. Ever.
Things are getting out of hand, though, when a size 8 is too fat to sell a swimsuit.
Syrians are Destroying Sculptures Because Allah
Dear everyone in the world: Just because your particular strain of god does not approve of something is no reason to take that thing away from the rest of us.
When you destroy a sculpture that is thousands of years old, you can’t just make a new one.
Unfortunately, this sculpture ended up in one of those places where the prevailing belief system says that historical significance is not a good enough reason to keep something around if there is a face on it.
So thanks, religious extremists, for taking something away from the rest of the world because you believe it will lead to eternal damnation! You guys are the best!