The Swedish aulta-feminist paty, Feministiskt initiativ has won a seat in the European Parliament.
Exit Polls: Sweden Feminist Party Goes to Brussels
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/exit-polls-sweden-feminist-party-brussels-23864148
Topic: Study: Everyone hates environmentalists and feminists - page 21. (Read 80438 times)
lol... look at Germany and Japan. Classic!
....
It's becoming faddish again to mentally bra-burn. ....
"I take a lot of pride in calling myself a feminist and always have," she wrote the newspaper in an email. "We're going to have to insist on correcting bigotry as it happens, in real time. And fear of women's equality, or the diminishment of it, is a kind of bigotry. I think it's important to remove the stigma associated with women's equality, and as such, yes, normalizing the word 'feminist' and making sure people know what it means is incredibly important, whether we're talking to celebrities or anyone."
It's becoming faddish again to mentally bra-burn. ....
"I take a lot of pride in calling myself a feminist and always have," she wrote the newspaper in an email. "We're going to have to insist on correcting bigotry as it happens, in real time. And fear of women's equality, or the diminishment of it, is a kind of bigotry. I think it's important to remove the stigma associated with women's equality, and as such, yes, normalizing the word 'feminist' and making sure people know what it means is incredibly important, whether we're talking to celebrities or anyone."
It could be interesting if they went back to bra burning.....
But when they start talking, so dull...
Shailene Woodley is fast-rising movie star, and at age 22, she's already thrown the country's most uptight feminists into a tizzy.
Time magazine asked Woodley: "Do you consider yourself a feminist?" To say she didn't give the Hollywood answer would be an understatement.
"No, because I love men, and I think the idea of 'raise women to power, take the men away from the power' is never going to work out because you need balance."
Many women continue to reject "feminism" because it evokes an ideological rigidity grounded in the hostility toward men. That, in turn, drives feminists around a bend.
The New York Times took up the outrage over the Time interview with Woodley. Novelist Jennifer Weiner, 44, went to Twitter to deliver her lecture, "Dear Young Actresses: Before you sound off on feminists and how you're not one, please figure out what feminism is." MSNBC contributor Zerlina Maxwell complained, "Here's another actress rejecting a feminist label she can't define properly."
This sputtering is a bit amusing. Feminists insist you support their entire agenda or you're guilty of waging a "war on women." Apparently a woman who isn't a feminist is anti-woman.
Feminists insist they care only for equality between the sexes, but if that were so, why would so many women balk? Because they hate themselves? Or because after 40 years of screaming, it is pretty apparent that activist feminists in academia, the media, and politics will never stop complaining. Forty years from now they will still be waging a war on intolerable "patriarchy."
It's becoming faddish again to mentally bra-burn. The Times found twenty-something feminist actresses who are perpetually outraged at people's failure to bow to feminism. HBO star Lena Dunham said her "greatest pet peeve" is women spurning the term feminist. Last summer in The Guardian newspaper, openly lesbian Ellen Page lamented: "I don't know why people are so reluctant to say they're feminists. Maybe some women just don't care. But how could it be any more obvious that we still live in a patriarchal world when feminism is a bad word?"
Actress Martha Plimpton closed out the Times article by insisting the stigma of the F-word simply must be removed, and that failing to support the word was a form of bigotry.
"I take a lot of pride in calling myself a feminist and always have," she wrote the newspaper in an email. "We're going to have to insist on correcting bigotry as it happens, in real time. And fear of women's equality, or the diminishment of it, is a kind of bigotry. I think it's important to remove the stigma associated with women's equality, and as such, yes, normalizing the word 'feminist' and making sure people know what it means is incredibly important, whether we're talking to celebrities or anyone."
http://townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/2014/05/23/feminism-still-considered-manhating-n1842236
why evryone hates environmentalist and feminist
http://theweek.com/article/index/250346/why-people-hate-feminists-environmentalists-and-activists-in-general
http://theweek.com/article/index/250346/why-people-hate-feminists-environmentalists-and-activists-in-general
Too much interference in politics...
Environmentalists’ $100 million attack targets GOP in 7 states
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/22/environmentalists-100-million-attack-targets-gop-7/
Environmentalists’ $100 million attack targets GOP in 7 states
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/22/environmentalists-100-million-attack-targets-gop-7/
Colorado Environmentalists On Verge of Getting Boulder Country To Give Legal Rights To Plants And Animals…
Environmental activists and wildlife preservation advocates are a step closer to getting a “rights of nature” concept written into the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan.
Boulder County Planning Commission members agreed Wednesday night on a thus-far-unofficial comprehensive plan addition declaring county government’s responsibility to support the continued existence of all of the county’s “naturally occurring ecosystems and their native species populations.”
That statement, based on a proposal submitted by the Audubon Society of Boulder County, might not go far enough to satisfy some of the people who have been pushing for more than a year to have Boulder County declare that plants and animals have certain legal rights.
It doesn’t actually include the phrase “rights of nature,” for example.
It may still go too far, though, for some foes of the “rights of nature” movement, including people who warn that writing such a policy into an official government document would give plants and wildlife the same legal standing as human beings.
Planning commissioners heard from residents on both sides of the rights-of-nature controversy Wednesday night, when nearly 30 people spoke during a public hearing on the issue of whether such a concept should be included in the comprehensive plan.
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/ci_25814217/boulder-county-considers-recognizing-rights-nature-comprehensive-plan
According to educators and even some parents, young women’s outfits – their bodies, really – are too distracting for men to be expected to comport themselves with dignity and respect. It’s the season of the dress code – so instead of teaching girls math or literature, schools are enforcing arbitrary and sexist rules that teach them to be ashamed of their bodies.[...]
It’s not just proms that make for problematic interactions for young women. Everyday school dress codes disproportionately target, shame, and punish girls – especially girls who are more developed than their peers. In 2012, students at Stuyvesant High School in New York (my old school) protested the biased implementation of the school’s dress code. One student noted that the “curvier” girls were singled out – a v-neck t-shirt considered acceptable on one student was seen as absolutely scandalous on another.
Like the fathers at Clare’s prom, Stuyvesant administrators defended the sexist dress code by saying girls shorts and spaghetti strap tank tops are “distracting” to male students and teachers. This is a common theme when policing the way women dress – just last month a junior high school in Illinois banned girls wearing leggings because they’re “distracting to boys”.
To assuage the supposed distraction, girls caught wearing leggings are forced to put on blue school shorts over them. At Stuyvesant, dress code violators are pulled out of class and made to change into a large baggy shirt. (There are dress codes for boys, but they’re not as frequently enforced and all a male student generally has to do is keep his pants up and t-shirts referencing drugs inside-out.)
As I’ve previously written, this sends a clear message about who the schools really care about. Because truly, what’s more distracting: boys and teachers having to deal with the occasional glimpse of a girl’s leg, or girls being pulled from class, humiliated and made to change before returning?
Dress codes assume that it’s male students whose learning needs to be protected – and adult males who need protection from themselves. What girls need doesn’t rate consideration.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/21/school-dress-codes-girls-shame-modesty
Cool, the bash party is still on?
As long as I am alive and have internet access...
A woman from Los Angeles who was a tree hugger, a liberal Democrat and an anti-hunter, purchased a piece of timberland in Washington.
There was a large tree on... one of the highest points in the tract. She wanted a good view of the natural splendor of her land so she started to climb the big tree.
As she neared the top she encountered a spotted owl that attacked her. In her haste to escape, the woman slid down the tree to the ground and got many splinters in her crotch.
In considerable pain, she hurried to a local emergency room to see a doctor. She told him she was an environmentalist, a Democrat, and an anti-hunter and how she came to get all the splinters. The doctor listened to her story with great patience and then told her to go wait in the examining room and he would see if he could help her.
She sat and waited three hours before the doctor reappeared. The angry woman demanded, “What took you so long?”
He smiled and then told her, “Well, I had to get permits from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management before I could remove old-growth timber from a “recreational area” so close to a waste treatment facility.
I’m sorry, but due to ObamaCare they turned you down.”
She was lucky the spotted owl's lawyer did not sue her
Cool, the bash party is still on?
As long as I am alive and have internet access...
A woman from Los Angeles who was a tree hugger, a liberal Democrat and an anti-hunter, purchased a piece of timberland in Washington.
There was a large tree on... one of the highest points in the tract. She wanted a good view of the natural splendor of her land so she started to climb the big tree.
As she neared the top she encountered a spotted owl that attacked her. In her haste to escape, the woman slid down the tree to the ground and got many splinters in her crotch.
In considerable pain, she hurried to a local emergency room to see a doctor. She told him she was an environmentalist, a Democrat, and an anti-hunter and how she came to get all the splinters. The doctor listened to her story with great patience and then told her to go wait in the examining room and he would see if he could help her.
She sat and waited three hours before the doctor reappeared. The angry woman demanded, “What took you so long?”
He smiled and then told her, “Well, I had to get permits from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management before I could remove old-growth timber from a “recreational area” so close to a waste treatment facility.
I’m sorry, but due to ObamaCare they turned you down.”
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again. But, seriously, look up a book called "Merchants of Despair" by Robert Zubrin (link will take you to the Barnes and Noble listing). He kinda has a tendency to rant but has some good points about how anti-humanists have an unfortunate tendency to hijack otherwise good causes including environmentalism.
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again
Yes we can! In any of my threads because, as the great philosopher 5flags accurately said: "Chiming in just because it's fun."
As long as I am alive and have internet access...
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again. But, seriously, look up a book called "Merchants of Despair" by Robert Zubrin (link will take you to the Barnes and Noble listing). He kinda has a tendency to rant but has some good points about how anti-humanists have an unfortunate tendency to hijack otherwise good causes including environmentalism.
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again
Yes we can! In any of my threads because, as the great philosopher 5flags accurately said: "Chiming in just because it's fun."
So I was trying to think out what the perfect environmentalist would be like. He'd only have and use one light bulb, and limit all showers or use of water for clothes or dishwashing to one minute. He'd stand on one leg all the time to have less of a carbon footprint. Drink bottled water that said "glacial" so it wouldn't be wasted. Likes beer, but it has to be vegetarian beer.
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again. But, seriously, look up a book called "Merchants of Despair" by Robert Zubrin (link will take you to the Barnes and Noble listing). He kinda has a tendency to rant but has some good points about how anti-humanists have an unfortunate tendency to hijack otherwise good causes including environmentalism.
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again
Yes we can! In any of my threads because, as the great philosopher 5flags accurately said: "Chiming in just because it's fun."
It is interesting that we can go from feminist-bashing to NASA and back again. But, seriously, look up a book called "Merchants of Despair" by Robert Zubrin (link will take you to the Barnes and Noble listing). He kinda has a tendency to rant but has some good points about how anti-humanists have an unfortunate tendency to hijack otherwise good causes including environmentalism.
Chiming in just because it's fun.
Gravitational orbits are around centres of gravity. The composition of the moon (assuming it is stable) is not relevant in a simple two body analysis, the centre of gravity is fixed. The complicating factor is that a Lunar orbit is essentially a three body problem.
And yes, stable Lunar orbits are possible. They just require a bit more fanciness in the calculations to take into account the issues surrounding non uniform mass distribution and the three body problem.
I have noticed that this was claimed, in fact that there were three orbits proposed that might be stable.Gravitational orbits are around centres of gravity. The composition of the moon (assuming it is stable) is not relevant in a simple two body analysis, the centre of gravity is fixed. The complicating factor is that a Lunar orbit is essentially a three body problem.
And yes, stable Lunar orbits are possible. They just require a bit more fanciness in the calculations to take into account the issues surrounding non uniform mass distribution and the three body problem.
I guess I am not sure whether to believe that. More like a six body problem isn't it?
Chiming in just because it's fun.
Gravitational orbits are around centres of gravity. The composition of the moon (assuming it is stable) is not relevant in a simple two body analysis, the centre of gravity is fixed. The complicating factor is that a Lunar orbit is essentially a three body problem.
And yes, stable Lunar orbits are possible. They just require a bit more fanciness in the calculations to take into account the issues surrounding non uniform mass distribution and the three body problem.
Gravitational orbits are around centres of gravity. The composition of the moon (assuming it is stable) is not relevant in a simple two body analysis, the centre of gravity is fixed. The complicating factor is that a Lunar orbit is essentially a three body problem.
And yes, stable Lunar orbits are possible. They just require a bit more fanciness in the calculations to take into account the issues surrounding non uniform mass distribution and the three body problem.
Why shouldn't we hate feminists? Maybe not hate them but should we pray themor what?
Read post #414...
Why shouldn't we hate feminists? Maybe not hate them but should we pray themor what?
A group of Hollywood environmentalists are defending their intentions to create an anti-fracking film funded by oil interests in the Middle East after unwittingly participating in a James O’Keefe’s latest sting.
In the video, O’Keefe’s undercover journalist plays a character named "Muhammad,” a member of a wealthy oil family in the Middle East who offers to fund a film to discourage fracking in the United States.
Actor Ed Begley, Jr. was joined by actress Mariel Hemingway and environmentalist film producers Josh and Rebecca Tickell who agreed to keep the sources of the funding secret.
In a statement to the Hollywood Reporter, Begely defended Tickell’s actions
“I don't think it's bad Josh Tickell is taking money from some Arab guy. It's much better than giving money to Middle East oil, which I've spent my whole life against,” he said. “Think about it. My electric car. My bicycle. How much foreign oil is there in that? Unlike these James O'Keefe characters who ride around in gas guzzlers, I've given no money to foreign oil."
Rebecca Tickell also defended their actions in the video.
"When we make a film, it's to spread awareness of the dangers of fracking, and when they asked us to not disclose where the money came from, you know, as far as we were concerned we shared the same goal, which was to end fracking in America," she told the Hollywood Reporter. "This film is so important that I don't want it to get lost in the shuffle of he said, she said."
Since O’Keefe released the video, the Tickells have launched a crowd funding campaign to help them make their anti-fracking film.
In a lengthy statement on his crowdfunding site, Tickell defended his intentions.
“We thought to ourselves ‘oh the irony! We’ll use the funding from an oil company to make a film that promotes green energy!’” Tickel said defensively, reminding potential crowdfunders that it was really all American money anyway. “We figured - What better use of our money than to make a film to encourage changing that whole screwed up system?”
Tickel cited O'Keefe's sting as proof that the pro-fracking movement would stop at nothing to stop them from funding their film.
“Apparently, its such a threat – that they felt the need to try and discredit us – to scare us – and to keep this movie from being made. It seems they think this movie – and the successful movement it aims to document – might be the most dangerous thing the fracking industry has ever seen. We see that as a vote of confidence that we should make this film,” Tickell wrote. “So here’s our request – if you care about the environment, if you want safe drinking water for your kids and if you want to join our mission – then help us fund this movie.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/05/21/Hollywood-Environmentalists-Defend-Intentions-In-James-O-Keefe-Sting
Hollywood celebrities caught on hidden camera accepting money from "Middle Eastern oil interests"
Jump to: