November 29, 2012

If someone *KNOWS* it is wrong, then why would they rape someone?

Maybe it's more like they've been told that it is wrong, but they don't really understand and believe that it is wrong, and they rape because they simply want to, and simply hope they don't get caught.

In their minds/consciences, their crime is not the act of raping someone. To them, their only crimes are getting caught, and punished, for raping someone. Later remorse is not due to the harm that they caused to another person, but only because they are personally being harmed because they are being punished for the harm they have caused.


Although I believe that there are flaws in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, it appears to me that his theory is a fairly accurate overview of factors that comprise the developmental process of what is generally known as a "conscience". It may be that rapists are way down on this scale of "self actualization"; like toddlers, (and conservatives ~ sorry, I know I'm being bad, heehee)) they act upon unconsidered impulse rather than consideration based in a conscience based in a healthy developed ethical belief system.



It's possible that one of the reasons that some individuals who remain in the lower, tiers of this scale of self actualization is because they have not examined their thought processes with any serious and objective scrutiny, and subsequently never recognized the negative institutionalized and/or enculturated mores that comprise deeply rooted parts of their belief systems.

Institutionalized, enculturated misogyny, may also play a part in why some rapists rape women. They are told it is wrong to hate women, but many of the underlying misogynistic societal/cultural factors with which they have been imprinted in infancy and adolescence are so strongly rooted in their consciousness that they are unable to even recognize their own perception of women is as a group that is naturally inferior.

It is very possible that, in our society, institutionalized/enculturated misogyny is primarily the product of widespread Judeo-Christan dogma, dogma that is illustrated in the examples below. These just a few examples among a multitude of examples of Judeo-Christian dogma, (and Islamic dogma as well), that perpetrates and promotes the continued institutionalization and enculturation of misogyny and homophobia in many modern societies.













And on and on and on and on, ad nauseum.

My point, relative to your question, is that maybe we need to adopt a new perspective and approach to understanding and educating all age groups about ethics, misogyny, homophobia, racism, etc. ~ because far too many individuals are apparently not getting the idea that these things they do, and why these things they do, are ethically wrong.

November 28, 2012

"Misogyny is ALWAYS going to be a problem here in DU"

Yes, I totally agree, and the reason for that is institutionalized and enculturated (meaning socialization: the adoption of the behavior patterns of the surrounding culture) misogyny. Many people have difficulty recognizing misogyny within their processes and behaviors, simply because misogyny has been a cultural norm for their entire lives, and for thousands of years prior, so they generally don't recognize the latent misogyny within themselves, at least until some life changing event leads to an epiphany (ie a sudden realization about the nature or meaning of something) and reveals to them the existence of their own unrecognized misogyny.

And this phenomenon is not just a "man thing", it is frustratingly prevalent among women as well, although it appears to be a bit more common among men.

Thank you so very much for posting the jury results, and for your candid response to my question as well.

November 27, 2012

I got pictures! But the thing is, on that first night, s/he told me that s/he was an angel!

By morning, I knew beyond all doubt that s/he wasn't lyin'. Yep. mmmm, uh-huh..definitely an angel.

But, alas, because I was born LGBT, I cannot prove that our encounter made me gay; it simply made me very, very, very....very, very, very, very glad that I am.

Poor, misguided Contessa has it all backwards, an unfortunate trait that all ignorant, hateful, bigoted RW conservative religious people share.

?
Caption: RW conservative christian homophobes perform
Ceremony of Hate at Church Services in rural Westboro, Kansas.

You see, sadly, they believe that the devil is god, that god is the devil. That hate is Love, and that Love is hate. Naturally, therefore, they see angels as demons, and demons as angels. It's really very sad. Tragic, in fact. And extremely deadly.


This fact is as plain as day to every reasonable human being.

Anyway...oh...hey, I gotta go. I hear the beating of giant wings outside my window...

November 24, 2012

However, if circumstances had been different, and the election came down to whoever won Ohio's

electoral votes won the election, the story would be different. A repeat of the 2004 election theft would have been circumvented.

No one (except maybe Nate Silver) really knew that the election was not going to be decided in Ohio. While the (ok, alleged, if you like) actions of Anonymous in this case were not responsible for Obama's victory, they very well could have won the election for us if the election had come down to who won Ohio's votes.

No one, that I am aware of, is saying that Anonymous was responsible for Obama winning the election.


What we are saying is that they made an (alleged) effort to stop an instance of electronic voting fraud in Ohio, and that, if Ohio's 18 electoral votes had been the deciding factor in the cumulative national electoral count, then the (alleged) actions of Anonymous would have been responsible for Obama winning the election. It's not that Anonymous saved the election for us, it's that they (allegedly) located an anomaly in the Ohio electronic voting system and corrected it in order to ensure that the vote count would be accurate. They (allegedly) did a good deed, and made a non-partisan effort to make sure Ohio's electoral votes went to the candidate who won them fair and square.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter one whit who believes whatever about the (alleged) actions of Anonymous here, because the bottom line here is this ~

[font color="blue" size="10" face="face"]We need to eliminate electronic voting from our electoral process because

"An open and honest examination of the flaws in electronic voting will lead us to only one possible conclusion: electronic voting machines are dangerous to democracy because there is no way of ensuring their accuracy."[/font]
~~Rep. Dennis Kucinich

End of story.

November 22, 2012

+1 "Especially observing WHO is the most upset. Same old players.

And the goal is to influence people's thinking."

Exactly. Thank you for clearly illustrating the obvious once again, sabrina1.

A realistic, logical examination of their actions here, and the possible rewards and motivations for these repeated behaviors, can only lead us to the distressing conclusion that there are motivations behind their actions that are contrary to the interests of the overwhelming majority of people on this planet.

Their constant, illogical, ludicrous, disingenuous, sometimes even hysterical, doublespeak arguments defending the status quo, and often, arguments defending tangible corrupt practices of the status quo, are very disturbing.

They appear to be a group of of internet "Gatekeepers", people whose function it is to use any and all manner of propaganda to counter the arguments and information put forth by those of us who support democracy, democratic action, and the well being of human beings, over serving desires specific to wealthy private interests.

It appears that their goal here is to influence the most gullible, conservative thinkers among us, in order to persuade them to blindly trust and support the corporatist status quo.

They have many concerns, and their current, apparently overwhelming concern, is that we supporters of transparent democracy are advocating against and wish to see the use of electronic voting systems made illegal nationwide. These systems are proprietary, and are easily and eminently manipulable by the wealthy private interests that own and control them.

Their intention here in the current discussion is clear:

They wish to influence folks to believe that a collective with democratic intentions, to wit: Anonymous, cannot, would not, and did not, locate, identify, and hack into, electronic voting systems that have been deliberately compromised by wealthy private interests, in order to correct these aforementioned compromisations, and ensure that the machines function as accurate reflectors of ballots cast and ballots counted.

They don't want people to know that any individual, or collection of individuals, with the specific knowledge required to do so, can manipulate these machines in order to alter the results of elections, at will, under certain conditions. They fear that if enough people truly understand this, public pressure to eliminate electronic voting systems would result in their actual elimination, negating the great deal of time and effort undertaken by the wealthy private interests that forced these untrustworthy systems on us during the Bush era. Forced.

We gave no consent to this abomination.

Electronic voting systems are a travesty of democracy that wealthy private interests have forced upon us, so that they may manipulate these systems in order to help ensure that they can circumvent electoral democracy whenever they deem that it is in their interests to do so.

So, the question arises ~ Why in the world would any genuinely democracy supporting person who wishes to have transparent accurate, fair vote counts defend the use of electronic voting systems so adamantly and illogically, and even go as far as to derisively label anyone questioning the possible malicious electronic manipulation of vote counts as a conspiracy theorist?

Answer: They absolutely would not, unless, of course, they were, um, extremely limited in perception and/or powers of deduction. Because no reasonable person would advocate for, nor defend, the usage of these machines. The simple fact is that there is no way to ensure the security and accuracy of these machines to any degree even remotely acceptable to sincere, reasonable persons desirous of a genuinely democratic electoral process.

Those of us who advocate for transparent processes clearly have no ulterior intentions or motives, particularly and specifically, no profit motives, behind our advocacy for a clear and clean democratic process.

Those who advocate for electronic voting systems that can easily be manipulated by wealthy private interests, on the other hand, can make no such claim. So what reward are they getting out of defending the use of, and continued use of, electronic voting systems? This reward can take form in the tangible, or satisfy ideological concerns, or both.

So do the math. Either way, the answer to the equation adds up to "Why the fuck are they constantly feeding this anti-democratic corporatist bullshit to us on a progressive website?".

It totally stinks.

Houston...we have a problem...

November 15, 2012

Wonderful letter! Here is a pictorial tribute to honor our conservative soon to be former citiizens

As a hard core liberal/progressive, I believe that we should demonstrate the utmost tolerance toward our fellow citizens who desire to separate from our democratic nation.

I very sincerely have no wish to assert any type of proprietary control over the lives and fortunes of these (oh, please, make it so) soon to be non-citizens, who are so deeply distressed over the recent majority expression of the people's will.

May their exit from our nation be smooth and rapid.

With all sincerity, I say, godspeed to you, conservatives! Best wishes to the success of your fledgling Regressive Plutarchal Idiocracy!





__________________________________________________________________________________

Oh, those wacky conservatives! ~ a fond short (because there's soooo much more, and worse) pictorial remembrance of our departing (hopefully soon to be former) upstanding conservative fellow citizens, to remind us of all the wonderful things that conservatives have done for to our beloved democratic nation ~

Two short biblical passages, in the words of Jesus of Nazareth, that are so appropriate with regard to the approaching joyous conservative exodus from our great Union ~

"If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away."

"You will know them by their fruits..." ~

Picking up the pieces: Post Conservative America

Hope and Change: New Beginnings

November 7, 2012

We're safe.

There will be no dark, gray, awful years, like those unspeakably horrible days we lived through during the Bush era.

It feels sooooo good. It's gonna get better. I feel happy, and safe.

The SCOTUS, Health Care, Social Security, Marriage, Women's rights, the environment, labor, the list goes on and on.

We're safe, and our future is bright, and hopeful.

Thank you, all of you, for helping to make this possible.

November 2, 2012

Smells like teen spirit ~

Some apparently still can't, or refuse to, understand how slurs used by bullies to demean children in minorities or marginalized communities contributes to the perpetuation of hate and bigotry against these groups, causing a great deal of suffering and even death. Schoolyard bullies learn hateful, bigoted attitudes and language a from adults. Babies are not born with these concepts already in their minds.

It's not that we are trying to persuade people to stop using innocuous words like shit, or fuck, or doo-doo. We are only trying to get them to stop using slurs against minorities and marginalized groups, slurs that have helped institutionalize hate and bigotry into the collective consciousness of western society.

And it seems they can't, or refuse to, see the correlation. Just like back in the day, just like the people who could not see anything wrong with using slurs like the "n" word toward black people. These folks still think calling a straight man a "pansy", with the express intention of demeaning that person by implying that they are gay, or feminine, is harmless, and doesn't hurt anyone.

But it really does hurt someone. They need to look at at long hard look at the photo of this beautiful boy, who took his life, yeh, HE'S DEAD, and part of the reason he is dead is because childish hateful bullies repeatedly and mercilessly taunted him with all sorts of nasty names like "pansy" and "fruitcake" and "pussy" and *f***ot* and other nasty words over the entire course of his short lifetime.





So if there are some here who wonder why some of us, especially some of us who are members of LGBT, feminist, or minority communities, and many members of the dominant majority, etc. as well, seem overly adamant about eradicating hate language, just keep this image of this now dead child in your mind, and remember why he died whenever you have trouble understanding the reasons why those you consider the "PC liberal/progressive word police bullies" are so insistent on eradicating slurs from common language. And please remember that every marginalized child still living suffers more damage every single time s/he gets bullied.

This is as real as it gets. Those of us who are intent on eradicating bigoted slurs are not control freaks, as some here continually insist.

We are only trying to do everything we can to end the bullying of our children, and a part of this effort is eradicating the slurs that are frequently used to bully them.

November 2, 2012

It may be some time before they recognize this ~ it will be when

the last tree has been cut down, after the last river has been poisoned, and after the last fish has been caught.

Only then will they finally understand that money cannot be eaten.



We're going to stop them from destroying the planet before it gets to that point