Quote from: V3X on September 16, 2014, 07:23:01 PM
Yeah, well, Superman could still kick your dad's ass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFjuPbCShBw
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: V3X on September 16, 2014, 07:23:01 PM
Yeah, well, Superman could still kick your dad's ass.
Quote from: Cain on August 29, 2014, 08:22:07 PM
Reflexologists can fuck right off, though.
If your discipline talks about energy and you're not some kind of engineer or physicist, you will all be thrown out the airlock with no regrets.
Quote from: von on August 01, 2014, 08:18:41 AMQuote from: LuciferX on July 31, 2014, 09:52:19 PM
I was wondering whether these tropes constitute a form brainwashing Although I consciously relate to the zombie as a metaphor, I subconsciously might be admitting the "double-tap" as a reasonable way to deal with whatever zombies represent. The metaphor leaves a kind of dehumanizing residue. Zombies are less human than vampires, so the resultant trope is stronger?
Ever heard of groups like "zombie squad"? Basically, you have groups of modern survivalist preppers who use the thinly veiled trope of the zombie to basically represent a stand-in for riotous, unarmed looters that tend to crop up in disaster scenarios.
In more extreme cases, ive even seen "zombie preppers" justify themselves by saying stuff like "zombies = niggers. Of course we dont believe in a real zombie apocalypse" (naturally, NOT on ZS's official forums, but in more ephemeral places where zombie survival gets discussed).
So yeah...it definitely allows people to dehumanise others. Maybe not as some sort of "woo evil brainwashing", but certainly in the form of it being co-opted and sold as something innocuous when it really isnt.
But yeah...all sorts of fucked up shit hides itself in the zombie "movement".
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on May 15, 2014, 04:55:05 PMQuote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on May 15, 2014, 02:54:49 PM
But it's not what you'd think.QuoteNearly half of U.S. employers test job applicants and workers for drugs. A common assumption is that the rise of drug testing must have had negative consequences for black employment. However, the rise of employer drug testing may have benefited African-Americans by enabling non-using blacks to prove their status to employers. I use variation in the timing and nature of drug testing regulation to identify the impacts of testing on black hiring. Black employment in the testing sector is suppressed in the absence of testing, a finding which is consistent with ex ante discrimination on the basis of drug use perceptions. Adoption of pro-testing legislation increases black employment in the testing sector by 7-30% and relative wages by 1.4-13.0%, with the largest shifts among low skilled black men. Results further suggest that employers substitute white women for blacks in the absence of testing.
Wait, who are these people who assume that drug testing would have negative impact on black employment?
Quote from: Regret on August 20, 2014, 05:21:43 PMQuote from: Slyph on August 20, 2014, 03:45:07 AMHey now, I know quite a few nice people that are any combination of short, poor, bald etc etc. Don't use things that aren't insults as insults.
short, stumpdicked, poor, bald, plebian, chubby pedestrian, unemployed and unpopular I think
Come to think of it, most insults usually aren't as insulting as the insulter thinks.