What did you do with my RWHN?

[Pæs]

Thread summary:

RWHN: "PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES, IT'S DANGEROUS"

Discordians: "Why are you here, again?"

Same as every RWHN thread.

Not even close.

It's at least half right.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

RI and CT had to stop disputing their border on the Pawcatuck River in 1879, or they would both be forced to join NH. Not MA, NH. That was a fucking punishment back in the day.

...CT claimed a mile of RI a few years ago, and that law came up. New Hampshire went, "FUCK NO! DEMOCRATS!" and we be like, "SALES TAX RELIEF, BITCHES....oh fuck property taxes." And like NH went, "Trololololo." And CT be all, "Fuck this, we're joining NY." And we went, "Later spags. (finally.)" And then NH gave up. And then MA stopped charging tax on their liquor and got all of RI's business. The end.

-Suu
True story bro.

This actually made me LOL.

Twid,
New England is hilarious

The fact that you understood the entire scenario without me going into details says enough.

A few years ago, didn't a Vermont town, like, in the MIDDLE of Vermont, threaten to secede and join New Hampshire and everyone just went  ?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Oh, and until about 8 or 9 years ago, liquor stores couldn't open on Sunday.

Also, also, at least in most of Boston, you will be unable to find beer anywhere in a supermarket or a gas station, and there are no drive throughs for booze.

Villager's friend moved here from upstate NY and her parents mentioned they wanted to know where the nearest gas station was so they could buy some beer. I laughed, told them where it was, and said to go across the street to the liquor store.

[Suu]

RI and CT had to stop disputing their border on the Pawcatuck River in 1879, or they would both be forced to join NH. Not MA, NH. That was a fucking punishment back in the day.

...CT claimed a mile of RI a few years ago, and that law came up. New Hampshire went, "FUCK NO! DEMOCRATS!" and we be like, "SALES TAX RELIEF, BITCHES....oh fuck property taxes." And like NH went, "Trololololo." And CT be all, "Fuck this, we're joining NY." And we went, "Later spags. (finally.)" And then NH gave up. And then MA stopped charging tax on their liquor and got all of RI's business. The end.

-Suu
True story bro.

This actually made me LOL.

Twid,
New England is hilarious

The fact that you understood the entire scenario without me going into details says enough.

A few years ago, didn't a Vermont town, like, in the MIDDLE of Vermont, threaten to secede and join New Hampshire and everyone just went  ?

Vermont is Canada, they just haven't accepted it yet, and yes. I mean, nobody WANTS to join New Hampshire other than Freestaters and Libertarians.

"LIVE FREE OR DIE MOTHERFUCKERS! LOOK AT ME! NO SEATBELT! NO LAWS AGAINST DRINKING AND DRIVING! NO SALES TAX! NO GOVERNMENT EXCEPT FOR THE GUYS WHO RUN THE STATE LIQUOR STORES! NO...what do you mean we have some of the highest property taxes in the country?!" *shoots gun into the air*  <----New Hampshire.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

RI and CT had to stop disputing their border on the Pawcatuck River in 1879, or they would both be forced to join NH. Not MA, NH. That was a fucking punishment back in the day.

...CT claimed a mile of RI a few years ago, and that law came up. New Hampshire went, "FUCK NO! DEMOCRATS!" and we be like, "SALES TAX RELIEF, BITCHES....oh fuck property taxes." And like NH went, "Trololololo." And CT be all, "Fuck this, we're joining NY." And we went, "Later spags. (finally.)" And then NH gave up. And then MA stopped charging tax on their liquor and got all of RI's business. The end.

-Suu
True story bro.

This actually made me LOL.

Twid,
New England is hilarious

The fact that you understood the entire scenario without me going into details says enough.

A few years ago, didn't a Vermont town, like, in the MIDDLE of Vermont, threaten to secede and join New Hampshire and everyone just went  ?

Vermont is Canada, they just haven't accepted it yet, and yes. I mean, nobody WANTS to join New Hampshire other than Freestaters and Libertarians.

"LIVE FREE OR DIE MOTHERFUCKERS! LOOK AT ME! NO SEATBELT! NO LAWS AGAINST DRINKING AND DRIVING! NO SALES TAX! NO GOVERNMENT EXCEPT FOR THE GUYS WHO RUN THE STATE LIQUOR STORES! NO...what do you mean we have some of the highest property taxes in the country?!" *shoots gun into the air*  <----New Hampshire.

States still need budgets.

[Ben Shapiro]

One of RWHN children is going to try to kill him when they're older. Calling it NOW! Why for the children!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Oh, and until about 8 or 9 years ago, liquor stores couldn't open on Sunday.

Also, also, at least in most of Boston, you will be unable to find beer anywhere in a supermarket or a gas station, and there are no drive throughs for booze.

Villager's friend moved here from upstate NY and her parents mentioned they wanted to know where the nearest gas station was so they could buy some beer. I laughed, told them where it was, and said to go across the street to the liquor store.

In Oregon, liquor stores are closed on Sunday, and only open until 7 Monday-Saturday.

However, beer and wine is sold at every grocery store and corner market until 2 am. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Who posted this link? Suu? Pixie? http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/07/18/2322871/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-on-rolling-stone-the-fake-pictures-of-trayvon-martin-and-crime-terror-and-race/?mobile=nc

It's a damn good analysis.

For those who won't or can't click the link:

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev In Rolling Stone, The Fake Pictures Of Trayvon Martin, And Crime, Terror, And Race

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Jul 18, 2013 at 4:57 pm

Both Slate and the New Yorker argue persuasively that the Rolling Stone cover image for its profile of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, is a useful deconstruction of the idea that criminality will out itself on the face of the perpetrator. "The cover presents a stark contrast with our usual image of terrorists," Mark Joseph Stern wrote in Slate. "It asks, 'What did we expect to see in Tsarnaev? What did we hope to see?' The answer, most likely, is a monster, a brutish dolt with outward manifestations of evil. What we get instead, however, is the most alarming sight of all: a boy who looks like someone we might know." And Ian Crouch argued that "The stories didn't match the crime, either: the pot-smoking kid, the skateboarder, the student at the diverse Cambridge high school, the anonymous undergrad at the state college. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's older brother, Tamerlan, fit our expectations much better. He looked older and angrier, and the accompanying biographical information was consistent with the appearance: he was alienated, radicalized, adrift, and dangerous."

The specific expectation that's most confounded by these images, though, is that of the race of the perpetrators. It's easy to think of the Tsarnaevs as foreign when you're just looking at their names, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar, which he bowdlerized to Jahar, so it would be easier for his American friends to pronounce, and Janet Reitman reported in Rolling Stone, sometimes to Jizz and Joe. "If he had a hint of radical thoughts, then why would he change the spelling of his name so that more Americans in school could pronounce it?" one of Dzhokar's friends told Reitman. But looking only at their names rather than at their faces, whichever ones either Tsarnaev might have used at the time, the Tsarnaevs foreignness came to the fore. That's in keeping with the accepted understanding of terrorism in contemporary America, as a phenomenon perpetuated by men, particularly men of color, particularly men of Arab abstraction, from outside of the United States. Mass killings committed by white men in movie theaters, at elementary schools, or at public forums with members of Congress are crime, a distinct territory.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's selfie, which Rolling Stone was hardly the first outlet to publish, may have struck a nerve this time because it appeared in a context that's normally reserved for figures of cultural admiration, whether they're rock stars, movie stars, or star politicians—though criminals and raconteurs have occupied that position as well. It was an uncomfortable reminder for some observers that Dzhokhar's fans are capable of seeing his physical form as well as his bad acts, and that for some of them, his good looks outweigh the pain and suffering he's accused of causing so many other people. In that case, the discomfort is less about Tsarnaev's appearance, or the context of this particular picture's appearance on the cover of Rolling Stone, but on other people's reaction to him. But part of the reaction to the image itself is that it provides a reminder that an act we've defined as terrorism can be committed by someone whose appearance–and whose relative whiteness–might normally get his bad acts classed as crime.

A similar dynamic was at work after Trayvon Martin was killed by George Zimmerman, in what Jelani Cobb describes as the need "to assassinate a dead teen-ager's character, to turn him from a slight seventeen-year-old into a rapper in his thirties with facial tattoos." The assassination to which he refers is a photo that was widely circulated in the wake of Martin's death, that was supposed to demonstrate the potential menace he represented to Zimmerman. The man in the photo was more than a decade older than Martin, physically larger than the boy, who hadn't finished growing, and had tattoos on his face, hands, and neck. When the real Trayvon Martin didn't match the image of the kind of man who some observers would deem killable by virtue of his size and body modifications they'd deem menacing, someone tried to turn him into another human being entirely so the narrative would continue to function.

This is why cracks in the facade prove so unnerving to people who want to maintain certain policy programs. If you want to continue New York City's Stop-And-Frisk program, then you have a vested interest in it being true that criminals are disproportionately black. If you want to continue singling out people of Arab origin for additional screening at airport security, the only way you can maintain that the policy is rational is if it is actually true that only people of Arab extraction commit acts of terrorism. Making Trayvon Martin or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev look frightening may be personally comforting for people who want to believe that no one they know and like could be capable of dreadful crimes. But making Trayvon Martin or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev meet the racial expectations for their experiences is a way of propping up policies with far broader implications.

Yeah, I just violated Fair Use by quoting the whole thing. But I think her analysis is important enough that getting it seen trumps Fair Use.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Examine it all the fuck you want.  Dont give the sack of crap any more attention than he deserves though.  Unless maybe some attention in the form of blunt instruments against his skull.

I'm starting to worry about who is the monster here.

Due process of law, dude, or you are just another lynch mob with a bad attitude.

Give him due process.  If he's guilty, give him what he deserves.

A life that doesn't turn him into a monster? Some love and compassion?

[P3nT4gR4m]

i think if it was Time magazine and the exact same pic AS USED IN HUFFPO, WASHINGTON POST AND LOADS OF OTHER PLACES  RWHN wouldn't be getting his panties in a bunch.

but because it's rolling stone and shit he's all OOH GLORIFICATION! ROCKSTAR!

WHICH IS PRETTY FUCKING IDIOTIC CONSIDERING RS HAS DONE ACTUAL JOURNALISM JOURNALISM SINCE IT WAS FOUNDED when my mum was still wearing white socks.

And he doesn't WANT to actually analyze what turns good average kids into people who hurt people.

Not a lot of mirrors in the WHN house 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Examine it all the fuck you want.  Dont give the sack of crap any more attention than he deserves though.  Unless maybe some attention in the form of blunt instruments against his skull.

I'm starting to worry about who is the monster here.

Due process of law, dude, or you are just another lynch mob with a bad attitude.

Give him due process.  If he's guilty, give him what he deserves.

A life that doesn't turn him into a monster? Some love and compassion?

You CRAY CRAY, P3nt, the only thing that can SAVE THE CHILLEN is PUNISHMENT. Lots and lots of PUNISHMENT.

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Who posted this link? Suu? Pixie? http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/07/18/2322871/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-on-rolling-stone-the-fake-pictures-of-trayvon-martin-and-crime-terror-and-race/?mobile=nc

It's a damn good analysis.

For those who won't or can't click the link:

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev In Rolling Stone, The Fake Pictures Of Trayvon Martin, And Crime, Terror, And Race

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Jul 18, 2013 at 4:57 pm

Both Slate and the New Yorker argue persuasively that the Rolling Stone cover image for its profile of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, is a useful deconstruction of the idea that criminality will out itself on the face of the perpetrator. "The cover presents a stark contrast with our usual image of terrorists," Mark Joseph Stern wrote in Slate. "It asks, 'What did we expect to see in Tsarnaev? What did we hope to see?' The answer, most likely, is a monster, a brutish dolt with outward manifestations of evil. What we get instead, however, is the most alarming sight of all: a boy who looks like someone we might know." And Ian Crouch argued that "The stories didn't match the crime, either: the pot-smoking kid, the skateboarder, the student at the diverse Cambridge high school, the anonymous undergrad at the state college. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's older brother, Tamerlan, fit our expectations much better. He looked older and angrier, and the accompanying biographical information was consistent with the appearance: he was alienated, radicalized, adrift, and dangerous."

The specific expectation that's most confounded by these images, though, is that of the race of the perpetrators. It's easy to think of the Tsarnaevs as foreign when you're just looking at their names, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar, which he bowdlerized to Jahar, so it would be easier for his American friends to pronounce, and Janet Reitman reported in Rolling Stone, sometimes to Jizz and Joe. "If he had a hint of radical thoughts, then why would he change the spelling of his name so that more Americans in school could pronounce it?" one of Dzhokar's friends told Reitman. But looking only at their names rather than at their faces, whichever ones either Tsarnaev might have used at the time, the Tsarnaevs foreignness came to the fore. That's in keeping with the accepted understanding of terrorism in contemporary America, as a phenomenon perpetuated by men, particularly men of color, particularly men of Arab abstraction, from outside of the United States. Mass killings committed by white men in movie theaters, at elementary schools, or at public forums with members of Congress are crime, a distinct territory.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's selfie, which Rolling Stone was hardly the first outlet to publish, may have struck a nerve this time because it appeared in a context that's normally reserved for figures of cultural admiration, whether they're rock stars, movie stars, or star politicians—though criminals and raconteurs have occupied that position as well. It was an uncomfortable reminder for some observers that Dzhokhar's fans are capable of seeing his physical form as well as his bad acts, and that for some of them, his good looks outweigh the pain and suffering he's accused of causing so many other people. In that case, the discomfort is less about Tsarnaev's appearance, or the context of this particular picture's appearance on the cover of Rolling Stone, but on other people's reaction to him. But part of the reaction to the image itself is that it provides a reminder that an act we've defined as terrorism can be committed by someone whose appearance–and whose relative whiteness–might normally get his bad acts classed as crime.

A similar dynamic was at work after Trayvon Martin was killed by George Zimmerman, in what Jelani Cobb describes as the need "to assassinate a dead teen-ager's character, to turn him from a slight seventeen-year-old into a rapper in his thirties with facial tattoos." The assassination to which he refers is a photo that was widely circulated in the wake of Martin's death, that was supposed to demonstrate the potential menace he represented to Zimmerman. The man in the photo was more than a decade older than Martin, physically larger than the boy, who hadn't finished growing, and had tattoos on his face, hands, and neck. When the real Trayvon Martin didn't match the image of the kind of man who some observers would deem killable by virtue of his size and body modifications they'd deem menacing, someone tried to turn him into another human being entirely so the narrative would continue to function.

This is why cracks in the facade prove so unnerving to people who want to maintain certain policy programs. If you want to continue New York City's Stop-And-Frisk program, then you have a vested interest in it being true that criminals are disproportionately black. If you want to continue singling out people of Arab origin for additional screening at airport security, the only way you can maintain that the policy is rational is if it is actually true that only people of Arab extraction commit acts of terrorism. Making Trayvon Martin or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev look frightening may be personally comforting for people who want to believe that no one they know and like could be capable of dreadful crimes. But making Trayvon Martin or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev meet the racial expectations for their experiences is a way of propping up policies with far broader implications.

Yeah, I just violated Fair Use by quoting the whole thing. But I think her analysis is important enough that getting it seen trumps Fair Use.

thank fuck someone fucking noticed it.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Examine it all the fuck you want.  Dont give the sack of crap any more attention than he deserves though.  Unless maybe some attention in the form of blunt instruments against his skull.

I'm starting to worry about who is the monster here.

Due process of law, dude, or you are just another lynch mob with a bad attitude.

Give him due process.  If he's guilty, give him what he deserves.

A life that doesn't turn him into a monster? Some love and compassion?

You CRAY CRAY, P3nt, the only thing that can SAVE THE CHILLEN is PUNISHMENT. Lots and lots of PUNISHMENT.

I'M CONFUSED I THOUGHT IT WAS THE CHILLEN WHO HAD TO GO TO JAIL 

[AFK]

Thread summary:

RWHN: "PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES, IT'S DANGEROUS"

Discordians: "Why are you here, again?"

Same as every RWHN thread.

Not even close.

It's at least half right.

Not even.


At no point have I suggested people can't think for themselves.  I support chains like CVS and Walgreens pulling the edition because they feel it is the right thing to do by their customer base.  A customer base that includes many stores in the Greater Boston area.  However, people still have plenty of other options to get the edition if they really want it, and I imagine at this point you can probably find the article online as well.  So there are no shortage of ways to get and read the article. 


I've been very clear what my objection is (assface on the cover like a rock star) and what that is based in (insensitivity to victims/exploiting and minimizing tragedy). 


That's all this thread was about, voicing my opinion and displeasure about putting him on the cover,  I didn't suggest the government should do anything about it, I didn't say it should be banned.  This was made about me because you guys wanted it to be about me.  Because it still seems to short circuit brains around here that a Discordian thinks a little differently than them. 


You really should get over that shit. 

[Junkenstein]

It's not that you think differently, it's that when you're blatantly wrong and back-pedalling you screech like a brain damaged seagull.

It's dull and you'll do it for dozens of pages yet.