What made you laugh today - Fifth Edition
- Thread starter Eктωρ
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Not technically today, but...
From Science Diagrams that Look Like ****posts
This made me giggle.
Apparently a childrens song named "Küçük Kurbağa" (Little Frog) became popular in Hungary because it sounds like “köcsög kurva” which means "stupid whore". Little Frog (Küçük Kurbağa) translates to Hungarian as "Kicsi Béka" which sound similar enough to Turkish words. (Bağa>Béka is used in Turkic for different animals that live in swamps, lakes like Kurbağa (frog) and Kaplumbağa (turtle), Tosbağa (tortoise)
Dancing with Dystopia
Flin Flon
Jesus Christ. I really want to compromise with you, find a middle-ground, and come to a conclusion, but after doing 10 mins of research everything you said screams dumbass conjecture. I feel so ****ing gaslit when I talk with you people.
I really shouldn't get into this, but what in that quote was conjecture aside from the idea that the 'figurative blue pixie cuts got their panties in a bunch..."? Did they not offer the courses listed recently? Were those courses ineligible to fill whatever course requirement needed to be filled? Is the replacement course not trading depth for breadth?
Flin Flon
My problems with the post:
1. The comparison of intellectual left and right feels a bit ehg. I haven't seen a lot of intellectual left unjustly make 'facism!' remarks, although it depends what you read. She's not entirely wrong, legit concerns about the left exist and most people that write about neoliberalism, for example, are stupid. But I haven't decided how comparable left anti-intellectualism is from right anti-intellectualism, so I'll leave it;
2. 'Power posturing against whitey' idk wtf is meant with that and where she got that from? I can legit be uninformed about uni politics but it sounds like sensational garbage and conjecture;
3. I believe the difference is that the course was categorized as a 'survey course', meant to give a better impression of the art department in general, hence the widening. The course now more accurately represents what the art department consists of;
4. That the faculty is so incompetent and so unintelligent that they succumbed to a loud minority, when it was very clearly stated that the entirety of the faculty agreed to the change for reasons more than just the complaints. Nor do we know the manner in which the complaints were filed in. These are important facets because she's injecting a narrative that just leaves you thinking that it was an irrational, obnoxious and asymmetrical decision, when we have nothing to go by to arrive at that conclusion.
1. The comparison of intellectual left and right feels a bit ehg. I haven't seen a lot of intellectual left unjustly make 'facism!' remarks, although it depends what you read. She's not entirely wrong, legit concerns about the left exist and most people that write about neoliberalism, for example, are stupid. But I haven't decided how comparable left anti-intellectualism is from right anti-intellectualism, so I'll leave it;
2. 'Power posturing against whitey' idk wtf is meant with that and where she got that from? I can legit be uninformed about uni politics but it sounds like sensational garbage and conjecture;
3. I believe the difference is that the course was categorized as a 'survey course', meant to give a better impression of the art department in general, hence the widening. The course now more accurately represents what the art department consists of;
4. That the faculty is so incompetent and so unintelligent that they succumbed to a loud minority, when it was very clearly stated that the entirety of the faculty agreed to the change for reasons more than just the complaints. Nor do we know the manner in which the complaints were filed in. These are important facets because she's injecting a narrative that just leaves you thinking that it was an irrational, obnoxious and asymmetrical decision, when we have nothing to go by to arrive at that conclusion.
FNNNNNHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNRRFFFFFFFFFF
funny, that ?
Flin Flon
I've been dying to tell the story of how I talked to a Harvard professor (Stephanie Mudge) that wrote a book on neoliberalism (https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674971813) but completely fell apart when I pushed her on some of her remarks on markets (out of curiosity, not because I wanted a debate).
Anyway, you can always send me papers or whatever that you think is a better representation of the problems with neoliberalism, that I WILL read. Don't even have to talk to me about it.
Edit: words
Edit: she made an appearance on the majority report, too! https://majorityreportradio.com/201...ocialism-to-neoliberalism-w-stephanie-l-mudge
She was super nice and it's totally possible I caught her off guard btw. So, I'll just add that.
Anyway, you can always send me papers or whatever that you think is a better representation of the problems with neoliberalism, that I WILL read. Don't even have to talk to me about it.
Edit: words
Edit: she made an appearance on the majority report, too! https://majorityreportradio.com/201...ocialism-to-neoliberalism-w-stephanie-l-mudge
She was super nice and it's totally possible I caught her off guard btw. So, I'll just add that.
Last edited:
You probably just asked her questions that were physically impossible to answer. Her mouth couldn't physically move to the correct configuration for those sounds to be produced.
Flin Flon
How it feels talking to Densetsu
(ily)
Great episode.
Czechia had a trial with an Imam who was charged with support, financing and endorsment of terrorism. Sentenced for 10 years. Anyway, the guy declared in the proceedings that he does not accept the court's jurisdicition and that its verdict is not important as it is in contradiction with Sharia law. Defending this guy must have been a real dream job for his attorney 
The poor man is just defending his culture ?
Flin Flon
@Kentucky James VIICzechia had a trial with an Imam who was charged with support, financing and endorsment of terrorism. Sentenced for 10 years. Anyway, the guy declared in the proceedings that he does not accept the court's jurisdicition and that its verdict is not important as it is in contradiction with Sharia law. Defending this guy must have been a real dream job for his attorney
This is your brain on moral relativism.
Why are you tagging me?
