What is this, an Idiotfest on the blog? A third idiot in a row has graced us with his presence. And that’s just in a single day.
The issue of gun control is bringing out extreme childishness in many people. See, for instance, the following comment:
Also – we treat guns as if they are somehow mystically imbued, instead of inanimate objects. Sorry, but no. Given the ready availability of gasoline and and other accelerants that can be combined to form explosives, or simply burn down buildings wholesale for a few dollars, they are, dollar for dollar, NOT the worst people can come up with for wholesale slaughter.
It is both sad and scary that people who have zero understanding of how the human psyche works would experience the need to pontificate on serious subjects. The above-quoted comment is so ignorant and immature that I feel vicarious shame for the poor individual who made it.
Arsonists and shooters are completely different people, motivated by completely different things. This is why shooting and arson are not interchangeable activities. An arsonist does not turn into shooter and vice versa out of convenience. A person who sets a residential building on fire and a person who shoots into a crowd both have extreme psycho-sexual issues. These are, however, different issues that do not overlap. For a perpetrator, these are not interchangeable activities.
Jeez, folks, let’s grow up already and start educating ourselves.
Colleague: How are you keeping it together in the face of the horrible and disturbing events at the department?
Clarissa: By not knowing about their existence.
Colleague: Let me tell you what’s going on!
Clarissa: Nah. . . I’m fine the way I am, really.
I’m not even curious. I just want to keep as far away from the drama as possible.
Who is the enemy of humanity that teaches students to consult critical sources before reading the work of literature they will be analyzing? They all do it. Every single one of them. What is the basis for selecting critical sources if they have no idea what the work of literature is even about remains a mystery.
One student explained the thinking behind the selection as follows,”I just choose the sources that will arrive here faster” (meaning through the Interlibrary Loan).
Our ILL services work extremely fast, mind you, so this is a difference of 2 or 3 days.
The New York Times, the haven of the congenitally stupid:
Somehow, motherhood had slyly changed us. We went from basking in the rights that feminism had afforded us to silently pledging never to exercise them. Nice mommies don’t talk about abortion — it is relegated to the dark and dirty corners of our conscious, only to emerge favorably in the voting booth. Yes, we believe in a woman’s right to choose. No, we don’t actually believe she should use it in the face of women choosing to have their children. This is the feminist mother’s greatest taboo.
I have no idea why people publish this garbage when everybody knows that the absolute majority of abortions is sought by women who already have children. Of course, it’s easier to find some half-assed justification for being a lousy friend and a worthless human being that to recognize that your boring judgmentalism is evidence of how deeply miserable you are with your own life. I only wonder why the NYTimes thinks it necessary to expose its readers to the rantings of such stupid and uninsightful people.
What is especially cute is how this brainless idiot slips into the royal “we” when discussing her own incapacity of being a good friend. Somehow this all becomes about feminism and abortion rights when the real issue is the author’s personal misery that makes her want to judge people all day long.
It is only too often that people try to hide their personal issues behind the veneer of politics.