Skip to content
  • Author: Calliander
  • Email Address: calliander at insult dot org
  • Contribution: 646 rants by this author
  • Percent of Insult: 27.56%

Why You Should Pay Attention to Madison Cawthorn's Fate

So the liberal grifters and their sycophantic followers are crowing about Madison Cawthorn's loss in the primary. As well they should, since he'll be gone... but it's not like his replacement will be better. And a Democrat still has to beat that replacement somehow. At least this bag of dicks acknowledges that in his tweet:

Now, let me make myself clear: Cawthorn is a piece of crap. But, as the saying goes, broken clocks or something.

Cawthorn didn't lose because of any demerits with regard to his representation. The GOP took him down because, despite the absurdity of his sex party story, that shit was true and they did not like him exposing it.

Much like how the Qanon people are not 100% wrong — there's a child sex trafficking thing going on, and there are Democrats involved, but the leaders with the most terabytes and whatnot are prominent Republicans — Cawthorn got a little too close to the truth when he ratted out his fellows and it didn't fit the narrative.

Say what you want about the guy, just like I did above, but that took some guts on his part. He had to have known they'd tank him.

Madison Cawthorn in an access hallway, looking perturbedAnyway: Why is this important? And why should you pay attention to it?

If you're a liberal, it should signal to you that some of these Republican shitbirds can be made to turn against their own without voluntarily leaving Congress ala Jeff Flake or Justin Amash (and he even went IND beforehand to be extra sure). That has to be something that can be utilized beyond inviting someone to a cocaine party.

If you're a conservative, you should take a long, hard look at what happened here before you dismiss Cawthorn as being a RINO or not having been fully committed to the cause. He did everything right up until he didn't. Snitches get stitches, but he pushed the door ever-so-slightly ajar on the bullshit Republicans are up to behind the scenes as they claim to represent the values of their voters.

Fresh since 21 you suckers. (Post #21, that is.)

Stop Being Manipulated

A desperate plea for people to stop enabling lousy news.

Hey there, kids. How are you doing? I've got a long one for ya but I promise it's worth the read.

I've been trying to stay on an even keel here since the Presidential election. While I've always been a fairly liberal person, I haven't been a registered Democrat since the 2004 Presidential election because I recognized that the Democratic party was a corrupt mess. Similarly, I've known for even longer that the Republican party doesn't have the best interests of the United States in mind. In other words, I'm pretty jaded, politically. I have hopes and dreams about a utopian society but I'm a realist and recognize those are silly.

Now despite the man's obvious lunacy, his associations with awful people, and the terrible things he said (and the shitty way he said them), I opted to hunker down and let Donald J. Trump get his Presidency on. In my mind, most of his campaign promises - while vile and moronic - were inattainable fluff. (LOL)

In an attempt to inform myself, I made a post-election quest to talk to people who voted and figure out what made them tick. Now, I had come across Michael Moore's speech about the Ford plant and the molotov cocktail and had dismissed it as irrelevant at some point, but with hindsight deigned to view it again. In combination with the insightful series that Van Jones made (The Messy Truth) I felt genuinely awful about the circumstances that lead people to voting Trump.

The unrestrained liberal left was so smug, haughty, and stuck in their echo chamber that a good majority of his supporters desperately needed to tell them to fuck off. So I sought to let the man do his work. Obviously, Trump has come at the job like a whirlwind already, but that isn't a topic I'm going to be discussing.

You see, there's a different thing that's got my panties in a bunch: Both sides are in their echo chambers and it's only gotten worse. The divide is being strengthened via partisan news sources, something many of you know will know I've been railing against for years now.

What am I talking about? Facebook pages that share stupid memes and news stories bearing emotionally manipulative headlines - and the lousy web sites that peddle those things. You know what I'm talking about:


Oh really, destroyed, you say? I guess we'll need to get some new Republicans.


I'll bet whatever this article contains, it's either misleading or an extreme stretch.


I'm not even going to point out the stupidity of this meme.


Real mature, guys. Why bother writing this?

The news feed of your average liberal or conservative right now is a mix of completely worthless junk like that. My problem here is that these kinds of pages/web sites don't offer anything constructive. All they do is give the average idiot who thinks they are politically active the simulation of sticking it to someone they disagree with. It's emotional manipulation, it's bald-faced, and it's utterly confusing to me that people let themselves be swindled by it.

Being the computer nerd I am, I did some digging on six liberal sites, six liberal Facebook pages, six conservative sites, and six conservative Facebook pages: A single person holds the domain name registration of every single site I came across. With what little information is available through Facebook, I noticed that the email addresses attached to the accounts of each page's primary admins, while different, followed similar patterns - consistent with generated names, like the ones you see in those spam emails about your missed FedEx delivery.

In most cases, these articles that people see and click "share" or "like" on are stolen/repurposed from other websites and given inflammatory headlines to induce clicking. Several sites, once the page is loaded, access the Facebook information of the visitors - something that goes against Facebook's explicitly stated rules. Most do not pay too much attention to how their site looks, as it's just a vehicle to serve ads and misleading information. All twelve sites serve their images, JavaScripts, and other assets from the same, single CloudFlare account. Almost all of them had malicious scripts that simulated you having clicked an ad that generates money for them, and they probably sell the information they harvested about you for further gain.

That's right: They're playing both sides for profit.

So not only are you helping to propagate the basis for the "fake news" complaints across the web, you're also giving personally identifiable information to untrustworthy sources. Perhaps it's time for you to both wise up on attempts to manipulate your emotions and to broaden your horizons, kids.

† CloudFlare is a web-hosting company. Each user can generate multiple "properties" but each of those properties are tied back to the account. So there may be a unique ID associated with Liberal Site A and Conservative Site A, but both of those IDs are subdivisions of one account.

Interview With Donald Trump

An exclusive interview with the U.S. Presidential Candidate, unedited.

Donald Trump

Editor's Note: As he tours the country, drumming up all of the support that he can, we here at managed to snag a phone interview with him that was both enlightening and a little scary at times. Our author, Calliander, spoke with Mr. Trump for a short bit of time and asked some questions he thought were different from the usual ones.

Note on 11/22/2016: We are pleased to finally be able to release the rest of this interview! A good amount of it had to be trimmed out for reasons we can't mention, but now can be added back in.

Calliander: Mr. Trump, thank you very much for your time. I know you are quite busy and we are a fairly small outfit.

Trump: Yeah, I can see that. I just pulled your site up on my iPhone and you've got three obvious joke articles on there, no advertising at all. You guys catch anything for the one about pit bulls after Montreal?

C: No. We haven't put any effort into getting out there yet. Since we have a limited amount of time let me start by saying that you can feel free to be completely honest. In all likelihood, nobody's going to believe I even spoke to you.

T: Fire away, kid.

C: A lot of news outlets like to focus on things like your temperament and vilifying your supporters, along with claiming that your rhetoric is dangerous and harmful. Only a few have put forward that perhaps you're kidding - or, as the internet puts it - trolling. What do you think about that?

T: You said nobody would even believe you spoke with me, right? Well, it's kind of true.

C: Can you elaborate on that? Are you saying that you are kidding?

T: Does it seem likely to you that someone could seriously be unaware of how contradictory they are? Do you think it's a good idea to build a wall or deport Muslims?

C: Well no, but a huge chunk of your supporters do.

T: Yeah, because they're scumbags. They're scumbags who don't want to be a part of where America is heading. And they're easy to manipulate. So I took advantage of that.

C: Wow, I wasn't expecting to be right. How do you plan to temper their expectations if you get into office, when the reality of balance sets in?

T: I don't. I'm going to ignore them.

C: What about the other groups? The gun owners, religious groups, and so forth? You were just at a convention with a large group of conservative Christians, right?

T: Yeah, I've fooled them as well and I'll ignore them, too. Anyone with half a brain knows I'm an atheist.

C: That's all well and good but you have to know that you're causing a lot of fear on the left and energizing a lot of hatred on the right.

T: That may be the case but the left will bounce back. I won't want to alarm the radicals on the right, but if they act on that hatred I'll take care of them. The important thing right now is getting those jobs back for the middle class. I don't know if I'll be able to but I'll try.

C: That seems like you're playing the middle class.

T: If you want to look at it that way, that's fine.

C: Are you playing Hillary Clinton then, too?

T: No, she's a good friend. We've already spoken about what's going to happen if one or the other of us wins. It will be very cordial.

C: So you're saying that, as President, you'll work with Hillary Clinton?

T: I'll probably make her Secretary of State again. laughs

C: That would anger a lot of your base.

T: Do I sound like I care about that?

C: It doesn't seem like it.

T: In all likelihood I'll probably give some jobs to the people most critical of me, like Chris Christie.

C: That would be a surprising turn of events. Some might call that flip-flopping.

T: Again: Do I sound like I care about that?

C: I guess not. A Donald Trump Presidency, then, would not include building a wall or any of the other inflammatory stuff?

T: Of course not. Even if I meant those things, they'd be impossible to get past the idiots in Congress. You've got to read between my lines and see that what I have is a really great tax plan, a path to single-payer healthcare just like my fellow Republicans wanted during Bill Clinton's years, and an assault weapons ban.

C: Isn't an assault weapons ban impossible to implement? And isn't "assault weapons" a sort of vacuous term?

T: I didn't make that term up. But I'll make the ban happen.

C: Sorry, I can't resist - what about President Obama?

T: He's a good guy. But I'm not sorry about dragging him through the mud in order to gain the confidence of my voters.

C: You mean the birther movement, which you recently disavowed.

T: laughs Yeah, wasn't that genius?

C: On a professional level, yes. Ah, I think we are close to the end of our time. Do you have anything else to add, Mr. Trump?

T: Yes. When I win, I am going to take immense joy in proving all of my haters wrong. I'm going to run a strong White House and will not cause any wars. I'll surround myself with people who know the things I don't know, and they'll be the best. This November, make sure you vote for me and help to make America great again.

C: Thank you for your time, Mr. Trump.

T: It was a pleasure!

A Simple Explanation of Why the Supreme Court is Wrong

I am utterly ashamed with America right now. On Monday, June 30th, 2014 the United States Supreme Court ruled on the Burwell versus Hobby Lobby case. The result was a 5-4 in favor of Hobby Lobby et al. The general gist of the situation is kind of like this.

  • The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) mandates that employers provide health coverage for their employees.
  • Part of that coverage includes contraceptives which more conservative business owners consider similar enough to abortion as to cross a line dictated by their religions.
  • In ruling for Hobby Lobby et al, the Supreme Court has allowed these corporations to opt out of having to pay for contraceptives.

The ruling was made with reference to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was signed into law by Bill Clinton back in the early 1990’s. That act prevents the government from interfering in the exercise of religion.

Monday’s decision was seen as a victory by not only the corporations with at least 50% of the controlling interest being held by one family with clear religious beliefs, but also by folks who don’t like Obamacare.

Both of those sets of people are assholes.

I don’t care about the Affordable Care Act. I don’t care about free exercise of religious beliefs. I care about women having access to birth control and other things which are entirely within their scope of what’s known to some people as “their own decision.”

Some people have made the argument that if you can’t afford birth control you shouldn’t have sex. Those people are even bigger assholes than the previous two groups. At least for people concerned with religious beliefs and people concerned with sticking it to the Commander in Chief, being a part of either group isn’t inclusive of being a dick. If you can honestly say something as cold as, “If she can’t afford it then maybe she shouldn’t spread her legs,” then guess what? You are an exemplary example of a ruthless jerk!

Anyway, while I do support all of the stuff that women are concerned about there’s a much simpler reason for my ignominy and it stems from an even more base thing that Americans seem to have a problem comprehending: logic.

These same corporations, during their hiring process, cannot discriminate against potential employees who don’t share their religious values. THEREFORE, the very same law that prevents such treatment also prevents the corporation from forcing those values upon said employees since that would be the exact same discrimination.

That’s the end of the fucking discussion. That trumps the exercise of religious freedom – which, by the way, is a thoroughly disingenuous rallying cry for anything that anyone does in its name. Want to have a discussion about abortion? That’s fine, it’s a perfectly acceptable topic. But don’t operate a for-profit business in the United States if the issue means that much to you because you’re hiring from a diverse crowd who, guaranteed, will not share your views.

There’s talk of liberal idiots saying to burn down Hobby Lobby stores and whatnot, as well. If you’re a person of sound mind and you see talk of such things, please take appropriate action and report it. This is a tremendously important issue but it certainly doesn’t warrant violence or vandalism.

Boobies Everywhere

Hey jerks, before I get into things, let me just make it known that I’m aware my choice of title for this rant is kind of counterproductive. It also grabs attention.

Okay: my special lady showed me this article that a friend of hers posted on Facebook the other day. If you don’t want to read it, it’s an article about public breastfeeding. It contained this sentence:

Anytime the issue of public breastfeeding is discussed, there is always a man who makes the statement that if a woman is allowed to “whip out her breast” in public, he should be allowed to do the same thing with his dick.

It then showed some screenshots of dudes saying pretty much that, and listed some pretty good reasons why penises do not equal breasts. I commend the article for taking on such a ridiculous comparison and they did a fine job explaining why that conflation is absurd. Despite my desire to do so, I could not do a better job. I did, however, wish to have a go at the opposition to public breastfeeding in general, since I have a particularly useful point of view on it.

This is quite clever. I approve.
This is quite clever. I approve.

Aside from my idiotic brethren who spout fallacious arguments like the one I quoted above, there are still innumerable people who are a little less malicious in their wording but nonetheless walking around with asinine views on the matter. One of the most common “less aggressive” things that people tend to say is, “Why don’t women just cover up?” They are referring to nursing shawls, pieces of fabric mothers drape over themselves and the baby which allow breastfeeding to occur in a more covert manner. There are many women who prefer to do so and that is perfectly fine but nursing shawls, and the request – sometimes, the demand – to cover up centers around what I consider to be an even bigger fallacy than the penis::breast claptrap.

What you’ll hear in almost all instances – be it a woman at a restaurant breastfeeding, a woman on the subway, a woman on a park bench – is that the breastfeeding is either offending someone or making them uncomfortable. “I’m sorry, miss, but your nursing is causing these other people discomfort.” I’ve got two pretty simple words for the people who see a woman nursing and think it’s gross or uncomfortable:

Grow up.

You see, I used to feel the same way as recently as five years ago. I hated kids, I hated parents, I hated everything having to do with children. As an extension of those things I so loathed, breastfeeding was just another unacceptable injustice I had to endure from “breeders.” Aside from that, I was also of the opinion that it was gross. If I saw it, my internal monologue said, “Yuck, that is disgusting.”

Well guess what happened? That’s right, per my advice above, I stopped acting like a stupid child and put on my grown up pants. I’ll have you know that some things haven’t changed: I still don’t think babies are cute, I’m still annoyed when my friends with kids post pictures of those kids constantly on Facebook, and I still get annoyed by screaming children when I’m in public. The big difference is that now I just deal with it. I stopped sexualizing everything around me and moved on, like an adult.

That’s another part of the problem that society seems to have. There’s nothing actually gross or offensive about a baby nursing. If I, a person who does not find babies to be cute, sees no problem with the act then that should probably be a pretty big sign. However, large swaths of people view breasts sexually and that is the only context they can see them in. From that point of view, I guess I can see how they would then jump to such a non-sexual activity being kind of off-putting. You guessed it, though: that’s immature.

So mothers, nurse your babies in public. Here’s a nice list of the laws and such surrounding the matter.

The United Corporation of America

I was going to write a really long diatribe about how the United “States” are done for.

I was going to do that because of the combination of asinine Supreme Court rulings, the death of Net Neutrality, and the government thinking things like drone strikes or spying on its citizens are okay. In my mind, it would have been a magnificent piece that detailed the various failings of the country and some thoughts on when it all started to go wrong. I’d even planned to end with some humor: joking about how things were going to change when I became Supreme Dictator of Earth.

I became really depressed, however, as I was writing. This happened because things aren’t going to change. The U.S. is just going to keep getting worse. Liberals and conservatives are going to disagree and divide themselves further, the same people on the effective payrolls of the same big businesses are going to keep getting elected and passing lousy laws that harm the people, and whichever President is in charge is going to keep making grandiose speeches about how Americans are a strong people who innovate and succeed.

The republic has failed. The United “States” are no longer a thing: corporations are king, and the regular people who continually get screwed over by them let it happen.

I was going to say something about how you should always vote the incumbent out of office, and how I envisioned that leading to politicians actually doing the right thing but that’s delusional.

This isn’t a country of innovators and people who succeed, nor one that promises every person a fair shot. This is a country of unethical thieves with the means to keep themselves in power.

America sucks, end of story.

Oh, You Dumb Americans

I had to get some money out of the ATM today. (A Bank of America ATM!)

The bank I went to has the building, then a teller lane, then the parking lot, so there is a crosswalk over the teller lane. There’s also a huge sign that says, “Please do not block crosswalk.” If you can’t figure out why that sign is there, even without a visual depiction of the area I’m talking about, you may not wish to read further.

I turned to walk back to my car after getting the money and there was a girl – like, mid twenties or late twenties, on her cell phone with one of those small dogs in her lap. I laughed at the situation because – first of all – since when do people younger than sixty use the drive up teller and – secondly – it isn’t a particularly small sign. This is completely ignoring the fact that crosswalks are for pedestrians to assume some pseudo safety across a road that vehicles use. So I decided to take a picture, got her lined up properly with the sign in the picture and everything. She then rolled down her window and said, “What the fuck are you taking a picture of?” The dog began barking immediately. I’m pretty sure she’d lowered the phone, thus making it so that whoever was on the other end was just hearing yips.

I laughed and pointed to the sign, which prompted her to say, “So what, asshole?”

I said, “It’s funny because the sign is clearly visible and yet you’re blocking the crosswalk.” Because it is funny.

Her response? “That’s fucking rude,” with one of those frustrated exhalations of air.

My reply: “It isn’t rude. Either you didn’t see the sign or you don’t care: it’s funny.”

Then came the golden question, the one I used to love getting when I worked customer service since I have so many ways of saying yes to it: “Are you calling me stupid?”

I made a quick summation of her character and explained, “If you had a sign in your bathroom for male guests to either not pee on the seat or to clean up after themselves, and you found pee on the seat, what would you think about the guy who did it?” She was able to pick up what I was putting down and appropriately cursed at me, 800 words per second.

When she finally wound down she finished with, “You dumb shit, like you’re mister perfect!”

I couldn’t have asked for a better declaration. I said, “Well if the situation was reversed then I would either say, ‘Oh man, I didn’t see the sign, how dumb of me!’ or ‘Aw shucks, you caught me not caring about the sign!’ and then I’d have backed up and that would have been the end of it.”

Probably guessing I’d made her look stupid, the obvious only response is an ad hominem attack: “Whatever. Fuck you, faggot.”

This caused me to laugh even more and I said, “Yes, since being a civil human is a characteristic that only gay people have.” Before I could say anything else, though, she peeled off! Didn’t even wait for the car in front of her to move up to the window – the girl simply drove off angrily!

It was then I realized: Shit! I didn’t get the picture!

My only solace is that she probably was angry for the whole rest of the day, maybe composed a Tweet about it or something with hashtags along the lines of douchebag or hatersgonnahate. Oh, ‘Murrica.

An Unbeatable Argument For Taking Peoples’ Guns Away

Welcome, potential person who has some skin in the gun control game (one way or the other).

Let me possibly confuse you, first thing: I don’t want to take anyone’s guns away.

Now let me clear that up: You get more views of your content via “shocking” or otherwise manipulative headlines. If that causes you some indignation (as opposed to other sites doing it and just not telling you) then I apologize and I won’t be upset if you stop reading.

This is mainly about mental health. Before you go making assumptions, I realize that there are plenty of people on both sides of the issue who realize that mental health is a very important topic, and that they actually act on it. I also realize that there are plenty of people on both sides of the issue who proclaim they think it’s an important topic but are really just dodging since they are the first to decry mental illness when it “helps” the perpetrator of something like a mass shooting avoid the death penalty.

My sister suffers from mental illness. I care for her greatly, even though I’ve seen her say and do some incredibly terrible things to other family members – and even to me a few times, whereas I’m usually able to talk her down – and every time she goes through a bad period I always find myself upset at how little is done for her by the people who are supposed to help her: mental health professionals won’t take her in as a patient, the ones who do only listen to her for 15 minutes and then give her some drugs, the hospitals’ concern only extends as far payment does, and the police only care that she isn’t harming anyone if they even respond to calls from/about her. She is unable to hold a job due to her illness so she has to receive assistance from the state. My parents help her out when they can, as well, but my family is middle class: there’s little to offer. All that wraps up to be a dire situation and when my sister tells me she’s feeling depressed I can understand.

James Holmes
The face of an “evil” person?

The point is, the help isn’t there for the majority of people. Even for those with the resources it sometimes isn’t there. This is mainly because people either refuse to or don’t understand what it means to be mentally ill. My example above about the mass shooting illustrates the point perfectly: most people still think that “evil” motivates an Adam Lanza into a mass shooting, as if he rationally sat down and told himself about what he was going to do. This, of course, is asinine – by its very definition those actions defy rationality.

Now, the crux of all my exposition on this topic is not to discredit gun control legislation. I am not a fan of banning things because it ultimately doesn’t solve the problem but I certainly understand the argument: without access to the guns (especially in Lanza’s case) there’s most likely no violence – and I know that other countries have seen positive results from legislation. However, the real problem is getting the right help for people who need it so that someone like James Holmes doesn’t even find himself in a position to “rationalize” killing people. The lobby against gun control is so powerful, as well, that politicians lose their seats as a result of even small attempts to legislate. Of course that isn’t a reason to give up or move on, but imagine if mental illness got the same amount of power behind it that gun control has. People like my sister might be able to see a doctor instead of being turned away simply because she is a ward of the state. She wouldn’t have to be placed into a hospital and discharged a short while afterward when she still isn’t okay. The police would know not to patronize her or, if she does something worthy of an arrest, they would know to handle it gracefully. It would mean that the people who have previously felt there were no paths besides a Columbine/Tucson/Washington Naval Yard/Mission Valley mall would have support and, with any luck, lessen those types of atrocities.

If you’re pro-gun and thinking I’m on your side, think again. As I stated above, I don’t believe we should be outright banning guns. However, I doubt the candor any of the protestations given by the NRA and other supporters, though. Two, off the top of my head: 1) “Criminals don’t care about the law,” and 2) “What about gang violence?” They are, on the surface, decent things to bring up. Per my examples, a person who is going to commit a crime doesn’t care if using a gun is outlawed and gang violence is still a very big concern – but here’s my problem with that reasoning: Those things have nothing to do with the link between guns and mental health and as a result, you sound both uninformed and insensitive. Uninformed because a mass shooter isn’t a criminal holding up a convenience store at gunpoint or a gang member for the very reasons I listed in the first part. Insensitive because those protestations only come off as red herrings, and they aren’t consolations for people who lost loved ones; rather, they seem as attacks. Think about it – in reworked language, you’re basically saying, “This material thing [the gun] is more important to me than the fact that you lost someone.” (I get that it’s about much more than the object.) The same query I posed earlier applies to the gun owners: Think about what would happen if the energy spent on those protestations and lobbying against gun control was spent on advocating for the mentally ill.

Both sides of the issue, in their hectic dance, overlook the importance of the killer – the root problem that needs to be solved. If your gut reaction to these terrible events is contempt for the perpetrator, or to immediately pull out the second amendment, or to immediately begin crowing about laws to get rid of certain types of guns then I don’t think you are focusing your energy constructively. Like any other kind of social issue in this country it comes down to exposure and awareness. If you’re interested in learning more there are a myriad of resources to look at – a simple Google search for “mental illness awareness” alone will turn up many good ones. If you are one of those folks who needs things to be shared to you, a good start is the NAMI website.

If nothing else, I hope that my words have caused you to think. Perhaps, if you are all too familiar with the struggles of mental illness – be it you or someone you love suffering – you’ll share your story.

You Don’t Call Retarded People “Retards”

There’s a web campaign I noticed today that is trying to end using the word “retard” as a pejorative.

Several of my friends shared it because today (March 5th) is their awareness day. I am not here to somehow defend the use of the word or to crap all over the people organizing the campaign, though. I am here to share an embarrassing story of mine as a show of support for this. While I generally don’t mind insulting someone for things like their religion, personal habits, annoying Facebook activities, and a myriad of other criteria they all pretty much have a single thing in common:

You can choose to do or not do any of those things.

Granted, some people have addictions or mental illnesses, and I understand that. But most people choose (consciously or otherwise) to continually use hashtags or pick their noses in public. Someone who falls under the category that the word “retard” used to cover did not ask to be born like that. You’ll probably find that a lot of the things I get super up-in-arms about boil down to that or, at least, are nuanced enough to be in the same vein. Note that I said, “used to cover,” there – that’s because it’s a word that shouldn’t be used to corral all kinds of disabilities together.

My story is this:

After moving to Long Beach, California earlier in my life I started to get more exposure to gay people. While I considered myself a supporter of gay rights I never involved myself in any way and I used to call things “gay” all of the time. “Oh, that shirt is so gay,” and etc. Within some time, my friends started to tell me that while they appreciated me arguing for them with people on the internet and such, that my continual use of the word in a pejorative way was confusing. Initially, I responded in the way that most social Conservatives respond to that sort of thing – “Why are you being so sensitive?” “It’s just a word,” “I hate politically correct language,” “I’ve got all these gay friends so I can’t be a homophobe.”

Of course, in time, I realized how undeveloped and puerile those points of view are. I developed a simple way to weed it out of my vocabulary. Whenever I called something “gay” I would also say, “as in bad.” (To this day, if I slip and call something gay, you’ll hear me add it.) That probably sounds counterproductive but what it did was put it at the forefront of my mind. “This traffic is so gay… as in bad.” “What did that guy do? Wow, that was gay… as in bad.” and so on. It did not take very long for me to realize how stupid and mean I sounded.

It’s tough for me to specifically point out what people are using “retarded” for and to help develop ways to stop people from using it negatively. However, the picture I attached to this story is an example of what I mean. Campaigns like the one I mentioned are great starts and are making good progress. Calling people out for it also works if you’re thick-skinned enough to deal with the kind of dolt who would call something retarded.

If you’re someone who is mature enough to realize you shouldn’t be calling things retarded, or labeling someone some sort of “-tard” yet don’t have the self-control or vocabulary to weed it out, try to find something like I did. When you use it derogatorily like that, you’re implying that there’s something “bad” about having a developmental disorder.

Come to think of it, maybe replacing “retarded” with some of my criteria above or something may be worthwhile. “What are you doing? You’re acting like such a Catholic right now.” “Dude, stop saying that, you sound hashtaggy.” “You just went full nose-picker. Never go full nose-picker.”

No Tiered Internets, Please

I apologize for my “srs bsns” post here. (“Srs bsns,” for those of you not in the know, means, “serious business,” in a tongue-in-cheek way.)

Sign This Petition For Net Neutrality

On January 14th a federal appeals court struck down the FCC’s rules for ISPs prohibiting them from restricting or otherwise managing web content. Not sure whether you want to sign the petition for Net Neutrality? Check this graphic out.


Since ISPs are not classified as “common carriers” regarding the services they provide, the FCC is now no longer able to keep them from managing their network traffic. Immediately following the ruling, the big companies released statements claiming that they would not do anything. Please double-check the graphic above if you believe that statement. They are corporations and, as such, that plan makes 100% sense from a business standpoint. It’s a good structure to get more money out of people and they would, honestly, be complete fools to willingly avoid switching to it. So disregard their fake assuaging – it’s going to happen at some point… unless we do something.

So sign the damned petition already!

(Credit for the chart graphic.)

© 1997—2023 All rights reserved.