I believe that the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.
I believe all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of kinship, love and tolerance.
I don't believe in distinction of any kind, such as
- race, colour, ethnicity, nationality
- sex, gender identity
- sexual orientation
- language, culture
- religion, spirituality
- political opinion
- any opinion
- origin (social, national or any other kind)
- age
- weight, size
- looks, beauty or lack of it
- disability or illness, visible or invisible, of mind or body
- property, wealth
- birth
- other status or identity

Friday, October 14, 2016

Guess what? You've made a feminist of me!

Not really. It turns out I have always been a feminist.

Some things have happened this week.

1) Some people seriously think women shouldn't have rights.

2) There's this... person, who brags about how she and other women like she started "#repealthe19th"

3) I came here to comment these two things, when this happened (Ketutar says so: I have been watching Penn & Teller: Bullshit - comments), which lead to that I saw the show about 12 steps, and I reacted the same way I did the first time around. "But that's not what it means!!!" But I was reminded of why I like the show, and I wanted to see more, so I saw the Cheerleader episode.
And that one is so horrible I find it hard to believe.

These young women, girls, are being treated like shit just because they are girls. They are expected to do highly advanced physical stunts without any safety precautions or covers, which makes cheerleading more dangerous than ice hockey.

People look at this picture and see an athlete and his pretty little girlfriend.
When in reality it's she who has the more physically demanding and dangerous job
and he who's wearing all the protection.

And even though cheerleading has become more and more demanding and dangerous, and is practically something totally different than what it was in the 70s when it was decided it's not a sport, the status of it hasn't changed.
No, I don't think it's a sport, but it MUST be classified as sport to protect the girls! All these injuries, especially to the head and spine, will have serious medical consequences when they are older!
And people just think it's "basically just being pretty".

"Perhaps you should just keep your mouth shut and stay in the kitchen where you belong."

"Women should be in the kitchen. If they aren't in the kitchen then how am i supposed to live? I can't feed myself, I'm a man." 

Now, that's just pathetic. Adult people who can't even feed themselves.

"You can't expect a guy to spend all of his time in the kitchen unless he is better than a women, which never happens"

I agree. It never happens that a guy is better than "a women".

"Yes, save civilization and repeal the 19th!"

What civilization is that?

This? "The Latest Trend In Christianity: Beating Your Wife For Jesus"

If I can beat you up, that means I'm right?
Guess what, guys...

I don't think women are better than men. I think people are equal.

But this:

If a woman has told you "you can't hit me, I'm a girl", that means that you have wanted to hit her... and do you know what that makes of you?
Pathetic. What's the victory in beating someone weaker than you?

I have never said to anyone "you can't hit me, I'm a woman!" Because the second you hit me I know you are a pathetic loser. So you want to hit me? Go ahead and prove me right.

Frankly, all the "feminazi" memes are so damn stupid. 

I don't expect you to pay more for stuff, I don't expect you to get paid more either.
So if you think it's OK to pay another person less than you for the same job, because this person is of different gender, it's you who are the Nazi here.

I don't expect you to pay for dinner. I'm fully capable to pay for my own food. 
I am also fully capable of filling my fridge and cooking my food, too. 
I expect you to be able to do the same. 
Every time you say things like "women belong to the kitchen" I think you're a pathetic loser who can't even feed himself.

I don't expect you to open doors to me. I expect you not to barricade the doors either.
If you do, I know you are afraid of me.

I don't expect benefits because of the gender, I expect no disadvantage because of the gender either. For either of us.

I don't hate men. I don't think all men are this or that. I don't think women are better than men. I expect the same from men when it comes to women.
I expect people to not hate women, or think women are this or that or think men are better than women.

"I just don't think they should have equal rights. Because (no offense) they're not equal."
If a woman would say that about men, you'd call her feminazi.

I oppose objectifying of all people, men and women. 

I don't think my looks have any relevance to any of this, just as little as your looks, so if you start saying things like "they are just ugly old maids" you have obviously nothing intelligent to say.

On the left is a cartoon of what idiots like to think suffragettes were. 
On the right a real suffragette, Emmeline Pankhurst. 
She got married at the age of 21 and had 5 children. 
People who cannot separate cartoons from real life are a bit... special. 
People who prefer to believe cartoons over historical facts are idiots.

"All things valuable to mankind were created by men only, thus only men can have rights to use them."

You use the household appliances, I use the medicine. Also, I preserve and cook my food. You hunt and eat your meat raw.
Any objections? Women were gatherers, men were hunters.
The gatherers gathered the herbs used as medicine.
The gatherers processed food for storage. Among other things, they invented fermenting, which is how beer became to be.
The gatherers prepared the food for eating.
The gatherers invented agriculture. 
The gatherers invented fire, pottery and basketry.
The gatherers invented yarn and fabric.

The hunters invented how to make things to hurt and kill others.

Hunters might have domesticated the animals, though it's more likely women who did that too.
Come on. You are a hunter and find a wolf pup. Would you think "oh, how fluffy and cute that is!", or would you think "that's going to grow up and eat my prey and probably my kids, too. Better to kill it now".
Or you see an orphan lamb. Do you think "oh, so cute! I want to take care of it!" or do you think "oh, food! I want to eat it!"

But seriously. All the references to history and how "all the inventors and influential people have been men!" claim. That just shows an incredible ignorance and understanding of society.

Firstly, women were seen as objects to own for several thousands of year, simply because we are physically weaker. Men have been writing women off the world history, diminishing our impact and influence and taking credit for our work and inventions. It's the same thing with every person not a white male.
For a very long time women weren't even allowed to study. Still in the 60s women in Universities were told they are stealing a place from a "better deserving" male, a person who would not just get married and become a mother, but would actually work. Through the whole 20th century women had to fight to prove that they are just as intelligent and capable at work as men are. But still there are people who don't believe this, without understanding the consequences of the 2000 years of slavery.
There are still people who should know better who say things like "women shouldn't be working with science, because they are too emotional and distracting men". Total bullshit!
Women weren't allowed to do certain works. Not because they couldn't have done them, they do them today with no difficulties, but because "it was believed" women couldn't do these jobs. Not even when women HAD to do these jobs - because all able-bodied men were at war - did people believe that they actually could do these jobs. Women put together all the planes and tanks and guns and bullets used to win the war, and were rewarded by people telling them they did nothing, just let men fight for them.
There were a lot of things women weren't allowed to do.

One could ask why there were no female Leonardo da Vincis, then? Or Galileo Galileis?
Actually, there were, but most weren't allowed to engage in such "manly things". Those who did it against the society were ostracized. Some were even killed for daring to do "things only men should do". Some got their work and contribution stolen. After all, who would believe a woman? Even today we have people who claim Marie Curie was "just an assistant".
These are just the women we know of. How many brilliant women were killed or forced out of the field before they managed to do anything? How many brilliant women got their work stolen by a man the society today believes is the "father" of the invention or idea? They thieves wouldn't most certainly tell. Considering today's field I am certain of that there were a lot more resources there. And just the thought of that we have been wasting all those resources because of a brittle male pride... Makes me sick!

But, I know. You can bend it from wire and paint it with fire, and people still don't get it. More stupid people.
On a Plate - a great comic strip about equality of opportunity

You just don't get it.

Tuesday, December 29, 2015

Fat shaming vs Skinny shaming

I found out that some idiot created #FatShamingWeek.

I wanted to know if there's #SkinnyShamingWeek. There is. I found four tweets with that hashtag.

What I also found was this:

The stupid bitch writes "Don't tell me I'm "shaming" because if you didn't want to be shamed you would look after your body and not eat your heart out and do nothing. (That is if obesity was your choice)"

She also describes herself "Orla Kelly Savage, memer, degree in offending people"
Which means: "Orla Kelly, Idiot, Sheeple, Bully and a Crybaby.
Motto "Don't do to me what I do to you, because it's mean and hurts my feelings".

Sorry, Ignoramus, but you lost your right to object to people telling you both this and that when you chose to start "shaming" people. If you didn't want to hear the truth about what you are, you would look after your actions and not open your stupid mouth in public.

Later she says: "I just feel like if you know the consequences of over eating/lack or exercise i feel like you shouldn't complain about being "fat""

I am not complaining about being fat. I know I am and why I am. But you are not saying "You're fat, and that's none of my business". You are saying "EEEEW, YOU'RE FAT AND UGLY AND GROSS AND DISGUSTING YOU SHOULD GO AND FUCKING DIE STOP EATING YOU ARE JUST LAZY AND UGLY AND STUFFING YOUR FACE AND WAAWAAWAA!!!" 

Also, you have no guts to have photos that YOU actually took on Instagram, or a photo of YOU, so I am going to believe that you are really seriously envious to fat people who don't go hiding in shame and kill themselves, which is what you would do if you had the guts.

Also, this is the original image. Her sign isn't even saying "fat is beautiful".

Then there was this:
Apparently this rant appeared in Cassi Van Den Dungen's instagram.

Are the people telling you you are bony, ugly, anorexic, telling you to gain weight and "eat a cheeseburger" overweight? Or just "people"?

You are what you are "naturally" and you "eat what you want". Aren't we all? Even the anorectic and over-eaters?
You say you don't starve yourself. Hmm... Maybe. Maybe you do. But isn't it your choice? Just as it's my choice what I decide to eat or not eat?

You say you think you are beautiful. You are a model, so obviously you are not alone thinking that. For some reason not even that is enough. You are demanding that the whole world "allows" you to think what ever you like about yourself. How is it any of anyone else's business?

Why am I allowed to love my curves? Am I?
Are you aware of that there's a "Fat Shaming Week"?

And are you not allowed to love your bones?
Must everyone love your bones for you to feel you are worth loving?
Then how can't you understand how difficult it is for me to realize that I am worth love and feeling beautiful, NOT FOR BEING BIG BUT IN SPITE OF BEING BIG, when most of the world tells me I should be like you? How many colleagues do you have who are plus sized? How many of your colleagues are even the national medium size? How many of your colleagues are as much above the national medium as you are below it? The national medium is 12, and if you are size 2, how many size 22 models are you walking the runway with? How many of your colleagues are about your size?

Are you aware of that anorexia is a serious illness. Obesity is not illness. They are not antonyms.
Are you aware that people call people fighting to survive anorexia "brave" and "courageous" and have all the sympathy in the world for them, but people who fight to survive their overeating are called gross, disgusting and needing to blame themselves for the consequences of their illness, they are told to have some self-discipline and "just" exercise and diet and stop whining and complaining about "fat shaming". Because "if they seriously didn't want to be bullied, they'd change themselves".

So - when I'm calling you anorexic, on one hand I'm pretending to be a doctor, but on the other hand I'm saying I fear you are seriously ill and it's high time to do something about that before it gets worse.

When you are calling me fat, it can be just stating the facts. That it's totally irrelevant, uninteresting and a fact I'm well aware of, doesn't make it any less true. But it is also possible that what you are actually saying is "you are ugly and gross and disgusting and I believe you are lazy, dirty and unhealthy, and you will cost me money and how dare you to show yourself in public and promote obesity! You should get fit and skinny and stop hurting my eyes!"

It's really not the same thing, is it?

If I tell you to gain weight, you can tell me to lose weight.

What do you even know about being fat and how "easy" and "just do it" it is to start exercising and dieting, and all the complex physiological and psychological issues involved in losing weight? You say you are "naturally long and thin", which means that you have always been "long and thin" and never anything else. You have never worked one minute for your body to be "model size". So next time someone tells you to eat a cheeseburger, tell them "yes, please, just bring it!".

Now, Cassi... When it comes to human beings, we are kind of programmed to think "a woman cannot be too thin". But we are not programmed to think like that about pets. Are you aware of that there are these pictures showing how to see if your pet is too thin or too fat? We could talk about emaciated and obese.

Are you aware of that this goes for all animals. Even human animals.
"In humans, the overall physical appearance of emaciation includes a thinning of the limbs, upper body and buttocks to an almost skeletal-seeming state with an apparent absence of fat and muscle tone. The face is thin and drawn with a hopeless, vacant and distressed demeanor; the eye sockets are sunken, giving the eyes a bulging appearance. The scalp is bony with dry, withering hair that is lacking. On the torso, the collar bone, chest bone and ribs are quite pronounced"
The following is a visual demonstration of this using photos of emaciated women.

If your shoulder joint, elbow joint and wrist joint are the widest parts of your arms, you are too thin.
The same way, if you knees and ankle joints are the widest part of your legs, and the inner curve of the thighs goes inwards creating the "desirable thigh gap", you are too thin

If your buttocks go in and not out, you are too thin
If your scapulae, ribs and backbone is visible through your skin, you are too thin
If one can see your sternum, you are too thin. Visible collarbones and ribs are not worrying, but the sternum is.

Women's face doesn't show it as well in the early stages, as can be seen in the concentration camp victims... maybe we are just used to see the slightly emaciated face as "normal"... But this is Rachael Farrokh, a very brave woman, who had the courage to go open about her illness. In the picture left she is of normal weight, very beautiful. Something made her believe she was fat and needed to "lose a couple of pounds". In the picture right she weighs "40-something pounds"...
But there are some signs to look at. The "dimples" on your forehead. The visible eye socket. Sunken cheeks. Narrowing nose. The area around your mouth "dries up".

So, let's look at some famous women.

Angelina Jolie. Too thin.

Keira Knightley. Looks totally fine to me. Yes, she's skinny, but not too skinny.

Rachel Zoe. Too thin.

Nicole Richie. Not too thin.

Isabelle Caro. Too thin.

Isabelle and Angelina are great examples of this, because both of these women looked very different earlier. 

Calista Flockhart - not too thin

So... Cassi...
In this photo you look a lot skinnier than in the earlier photos.
I can see sunken cheeks. I can see the changes on your face. I can see your large elbows and knees. I can see how the inner curve of your thighs is "wrong".
I'm not saying you are anorectic. I hope not. But you look too thin in this photo, and being too thin is just as bad for your health as being too heavy.

Monday, November 9, 2015


A person wrote a list about time management tricks. She put on the headline "5 Time management tricks I learned from years of hating Tim Ferriss" and a lot of people got "offended"...

This happened 2009 and the comments have been closed for years now, but there are some of the comments I'd like to comment :-D

"Here’s a quick a fast rule on who to listen to:
I come to this blog and read tons of negativity supporting more negativity.
I go to Tim’s blog and there is endless positivity supporting more positivity.
Tim strikes me as a likable guy."

I'm sure. Like most narcissists.
But what you ARE saying that to you it's more important that a person is charming than what he says.
I do hope you stop saying that you appreciate honesty and hate liars, because you don't.

Likability is not a good thing to use to decide whom to listen to.

"Tim is positive. Penelope is often negative. Shoot by adding this comment I am probably increasing her readership. This article wasn’t that good about saving time, I’ve read better."

Perhaps that blog entry wasn't about "saving time"... but about what Penelope has learned about time management from hating Tim Ferriss... Maybe you might need to pay more attention to the TITLE OF THE ARTICLE?

"I suppose there is a market for negativity – which is a shame."

Looks to me you attract more idiots with positivity :-D

But... you have read two articles by Penelope and both were defined by you as "negative"... and so you decide she's "negative", and she's being negative to get more readers...
while you agree with people bashing her for her "negativity" - which indicates that you - among other people - find "negativity" as negative :-D
And then you are assuming that your very negative assessment of Penelope and her reasons to be "negative" are correct, and state it's a "shame"... which is a very negative thing to say :-D

"there is diminishing value and return in spending time on stuff like this"

Try to remember that. There's usually a storm in a waterglass going on. And that storm is not Penelope's... it's those people's who are reacting "rebuttingly" to the "hatred" and "negativity"

"Firstly, Would you say, Penelope, that this was an efficient use of blog space and personal time?"

I think she wouldn't have written it otherwise.

"To what end?"

To people who actually reads what she writes and are not "offended" by her "hatred and negativity", she gives five very good rules on time management.

"one thing he certainly does not seem to spend much time on is criticism of particular people"

His life, his choice. Nothing to do with Penelope.

"What does anyone gain from ‘hatred’?
That’s a strong word, used too lightly here.
Hatred? Really?
Not ‘dislike’? Not ‘my issues with Tim’s views’ but YEARS of HATING?"

Perhaps she really hates him. Who are you to call her a liar?

"I’ve heard Tim debate and criticize, but ‘hate’ is NOT a word I can recall him using."

Again, what does that have to do with this?

"It’s not even necessary for it to be a part of your common usage."

Perhaps, but maybe it's the best word to correctly describe what is going on.

"At the request of Tony Robbins, I began eliminating many negative words like this I used often."

Good for you. But do you know you are namedropping?

"Humans are flawed, we are not yet perfect."


"I don’t hate you"

good for you.

"Tellingly, an above linked similar article has disappeared from that blog, (‘why I dislike Tim Ferriss’)
Change of heart?"

How would Penelope know why a blog entry Shelley Delayne linked in her comment has disappeared? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the whole blog has disappeared? Perhaps that has nothing to do with anything related to this, as there are several reasons to why blogs disappear? Perhaps some Tim Ferriss fanboy hacked and hijacked the blog to remove all negativity about Tim Ferriss from the ether? Considering that you comment FOUR YEARS AFTER THE COMMENT?

"What a shame people don’t spend as much effort spreading what they do love rather than what they hate."

What a shame people can't see beyond their own attitudes to recognize the good in something.

"On the subject of posters claiming Tim avoids criticism and champions devotees - Who the hell doesn’t?"


"How many people expend effort communicating with haters, other than to defend themselves or return that hate in kind?"

Quite a lot, actually. Most of them try to tell the "haters" how wrong and negative they are for hating and how they really don't have time responding :-D 

Frankly, one of the comments was very good:
"When I see or hear someone going on about positivity and negativity, I pay attention only long enough to confirm my suspicion that they thereby avoid any discussion of the content of whatever they’re judging to be positive or negative.
Haven’t been disappointed yet."

"Tim is all about time management for achievement and winning. But there are not trophies or measurements for relationships. There is only that feeling that someone is kind. And good. And truly connected."

"I might beg to differ about not having measures for relationships…having relationships (unless you’re using the term loosely) is the measure."

The one with most relationships wins? I personally prefer quality over quantity.

"So most weeks Tim probably has a 100-hour workweek. It’s just that he’s doing things he likes, so he lies to you and says he only works four hours. He defines work only as doing what you don’t like.
It’s childish. It’s a childish, semantic game. And it reminds me of him winning the Chinese National Kickboxing Championships by leveraging a little-known rule that people are disqualified if they stop outside the box. So he pushed each of his opponents outside the box to win.
He is winning the I-work-less-than-you game with a similarly questionable method: semantics."

"Actually, this just shows he had a better understanding of the competition than did his opponents. If his opponents were so great, then they should be able to stop some amateur from pushing them around. Not being able to do so only speaks to their lack of skill. A champion fighter would not make excuses, but would instead figure out a way to beat Tim’s pushing tactic.
Remember when Indiana Jones shot the guy with the swords? Same deal – Indy was just plain smarter."

So he's smart. And? That's not being discussed, though. Penelope is not telling anyone not to like Tim or not to like his books, or not to buy them, or not to be his fan boy. She's not saying Tim is stupid or anything of the sort.
So if you want to cheat your way to victory, go ahead. I appreciate people who win fair and square more than cheaters, how ever intelligent.

Nevertheless, "Prior to his writing career, Ferriss claimed that he became the national champion in the 1999 USAWKF Sanshou (Chinese kickboxing) championship through a process of shoving opponents out of the ring and by starving himself before weign in to compete several classes below his actual weight, although this has never been verified and no public record of this event exists. In fact, the news and results section of the 1999 USAWKF webpage reveals no mention at all of Tim Ferriss competing in any of their tournaments. Likewise, an extensive archive of results in a variety of Chinese kickboxing disciplines, dating from 1999 to present, reveals no mention of Tim Ferriss."

Wikipedia claims Marvin Perry was the 1999 USAWKF San Shou National Champion

"I don’t think he’s tried to pass himself off as a GREAT guy, (he lambasted himself over outsourcing his dating life) but this article doesn’t do him justice. To be honest lady, Tim Ferriss is the ONLY REASON I FOUND YOU.

This whole article is about Penelope hating Tim. Calling her a "hater" is sort of superfluous, don't you think :-D

Also, she didn't say even once that Tim tries to pass himself off as a GREAT guy.  
She is explaining why SHE hates Tim.
She isn't telling you to hate him, or not read/buy/like his books, or that Tim isn't saying anything worthwhile.
This is what she says about Tim:
She hates him.
"how difficult he is"
"Tim is great at accelerated learning"
"Tim was brilliant to start this book marketing trend" (even though some of his tactics are questionable)
"I knew Tim, sort of" (well enough to have his phone number and being in talking terms)
(he's full of sh*t and self-centered)
(he's a spammer who doesn't respect other people's time)
"Tim got to where he is by being an insanely hard worker. I don’t know anyone who worked harder at promoting a book than he did."
"Tim does not excel in [relationships]"
"Tim is all about time management for achievement and winning"
"Tim is not [kind], [good] [And truly connected].

So, how well do you know him? Through his books and blog? Have you had a cup of coffee with him? Do you have his telephone number?

"to stumble upon a professional who I am supposed to trust, personally and publicly slating another only highlights the reasons why I wouldn’t work with you or trust your professional judgement"

Ok, that's your choice. Again, don't say you appreciate honesty :-D

"This post isn’t even comparable to a professional disagreement that has gotten out of hand"

It's not supposed to be, because this is not about a professional disagreement, and it has not gotten out of hand.

"it appears that this is a post thrown out there as a result of your own insecurity and upset"

Doesn't appear like that to me at all. "Upset" perhaps. Now, you need to ask yourself the question, why is Penelope upset? And so upset that she decided to write this blog entry she has avoided writing for TWO YEARS. This is not a question of insecurity, professional envy and jealousy.

"I do not know why you dislike Tim"
Funny, as that is what this blog entry is about. Perhaps you need to read it?

But to tell you what she says: she hates him because he doesn't respect other people's time or plans, he is an a-hole, full of sh*t and self-centered, he's focused on winning and doesn't mind bending rules, finding loopholes and lying to win, and he uses time management to win more and he doesn't care about people. She's not angry, she hates him. She uses the word "hate" several times in the post, it's OK to say she hates him.

"There is nothing brave nor admirable about this negativity."

Why should there be? But considering that quite a many commenters are whining about "negativity", and you are saying you would not hire her because of her "negativity", it is very brave and admirable for her to speak her truth. Her message is not to bash Tim Ferriss, but to share the time management tricks she learned having Tim as her acquintance. She's not talking about his books or what he is telling people.
She is saying:
1.Don’t hang out with people who don’t respect your time
2.Cut to the chase: Tell people who are full of sh*t that they’re full of sh*t
3.Self-centered people are more likely to waste your time
4.Productivity is about meeting your goals, not getting out of doing work
5.Time management is about making time to connect with people
That was made very clear by her stating her intention in the subject line and bolding these five time management tricks, so that you can get straight to those without being bothered by her hatred of Tim Ferriss.
But I suppose you missed that.

"I hope you feel better soon and learn to turn your anger into a more neutral, less hormonal teenage like state, for your sake."
Passive aggressive :-D So you're not negative, Elle?

"His methods are different than just about anyone else’s and his ethics surrounding those methods may be different than yours, but does that mean that what he teaches is worthless?"
Did Penelope say it is? No.

"Even if he was a “do as I say, not as I do” type of person, does that mean we shouldn’t listen and tease out what works for us?"
Did Penelope say you shouldn't? No.

"Even though I don’t live my life or agree with some of the choices Penelope makes or has made, does that mean I don’t have something to learn by reading her work?"
Did she say there's nothing to be learned by reading Tim's work? No

"While we would hope that someone who writes work that helps people does so selflessly and has other very positive attributes, why can’t we just take the work at face value and let the guy be who he is."
Is she trying to change him? No. Is she telling he shouldn't be the way he is? No. She is saying she hates the guy and why. She isn't telling you to hate him.

"His ideas have been pretty thoroughly argued against by people who disagreed with them already, but his personality is not really relevant to that process."
Agreed. But Penelope isn't talking about his ideas. She is talking about what she learned about time management by HIS PERSONALITY. And his personality is pretty relevant to that process.

"Tim Ferriss certainly has a lot of time to make sock puppet accounts. It must be because of his four-hour work week."

You need to reread this blog entry. Penelope isn't talking about sock puppets. She said "...told him to tell his employees to stop spamming my blog. First he implied it was his fan base..."
His employees and fan base are real people. Not Tim Ferriss pretending to be someone else. Perhaps you aren't really aware what a sock puppet is?

"...you are finding inspiration in this low ball writing, that does not speak well for you.."
"This is the most worthless piece of writing that I have ever seen"
"but then you did mention that we should call things for what they are. This is b**t"

Actually, it speaks well for Mark for actually getting what Penelope is saying. Reread the article and ONLY THE HIGHLIGHTED PARTS OF IT.

And your comment is still on... I suppose Penelope IS just as fair and open as she seems to be. But I won't expect you to acknowledge that :-D

"a post by a blogger who has dedicated a post to her personal hate that stemmed from admitted jealousy"
Er... her hate doesn't stem from "admitted jealousy".

"...also, his book, The 4-Hour Workweek, was a bestseller and mine wasn’t. So I figured people would say that I’m jealous. And really, what author is not jealous sometimes? I mean, every author wants to write a bestseller. But at this point, two years later, my hatred goes way beyond jealousy".
All the things she says about him are about him and not about his popularity or work. Her personal hate stems from Tim Ferriss being a selfish a-hole. And this post stems from that admitted hatred, not jealousy.

"Dude – you’re clearly jealous that his books is way better than yours."
Have you read her book? I don't think you have.
Being a best-seller is not synonymous to "better than". Just think about Twilight, 50 shades of grey and Da Vinci Code.

"Well, interesting. I’m amused by how many commenters, not knowing Tim, nor having read his book, are judging him on the basis of your OPINION."

Well, firstly, she is telling her opinion as someone who knows the man. That counts higher than an opinion of someone who has read his book. You learn more about a person by having a cup of coffee with him than by reading a book he's written.

Secondly, most of us know who Tim Ferriss is and have formed an opinion on him already. Based on what HE says and does and claims. Which can be seen by some people saying "I agree with you" and some others saying "you're just a jealous, hateful, negative bitch", totally based on their opinion on the man.

Thirdly, quite a lot of us have actually read his book. The majority, actually. Which is expressed. So "many commenters" is a bit of an exaggeration... "Some" might be more accurate.

Of course this blog entry - just as your comment - says more about the author than the object :-D

This blog entry tells me that Penelope doesn't appreciate aggressive marketing using any means available, and she doesn't appreciate people using other people as means. I agree with her.

Your comment tells me you think you're smart, and you think everyone else, especially people who disagree with you, are gullible sheep. You have difficulties in understanding what you read and you are not very good at expressing yourself, even when you read a lot and have quite a lot to say, mainly because you think you're witty and sarcastic, and think everything you can think of is too brilliant to leave unsaid. Which makes your opinion hard to understand.
And you created an opinion on Penelope by this blog entry, even though you haven't read her book, her blog or had a cup of coffee with her. :-D

Saturday, February 28, 2015

How to critisize Israel without antisemitism

Because that's what it's really about, isn't it... It's not that there are people who would call any critical said about Israel antisemitic...

1)  Don't use the word "Jew" or "Judaism" in any form or shape. Don't refer to the Jews or anything Jewish at all.

(But then I can't speak of Israel!)

Of course you can. All that takes is understanding that Israel is a country. Just another state among the dozens of others. Not a Jewish state. A state. As simple as that.

When a state violates human rights, people's religion, ethnicity or identity is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if they identify themselves as Jews or Palestinians, or Muslims, or Arabs. The main point here is and should remain so - that a human being is violating another human being's rights.

2) Avoid generalization.

3) Don't start referring to history and historical events, especially events of which veracity is questionable. You might be 100% convinced of that one version of history is the right one, but if there are several versions of the same history circulating, avoid it. After all, if the violation of human rights is a violation, it will stand on itself, and doesn't need backup from similar events in history. In fact, referring to something like Sabra and Shatila makes your story less credible.

4) Don't speculate about their motifs, or intentions or possible agenda.
Even if you are convinced of that the Jews are trying to take over the world, that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a true documentary and a warning to the world about Jews, even if you believe that there is a Jewish block or Israel Lobby, or Zionist agenda, even when you are absolutely certain of that Israel is trying to kill all the Palestinians, or at least make their lives a living hell, so that they will give up and go die somewhere else.

5) Avoid the use of inflammatory words like murder, genocide, torture, terrorism, concentration camp, etc. Even if you are 100% certain of that a crime has been committed, one of the Western civilization's ground pillars is "innocent until proven guilty".
Also, it is much easier to actually listen to people who say "1000 children have lost their lives in the Israel-Palestine conflict" than "the murderous Zionist bastards have slaughtered 1000 innocent Palestinian children!!!"
In the first case I can focus on the horrible fact of 1000 lives being lost, and start working toward finding solutions to that not one more child needs to die.
In the second case I think "Oh, it's those people whining again... I'm sure there's not even one real victim, and if there was, that was probably killed by his/her own people." and have no whatsoever inclination to discuss with you.
Try to say something similar but about the other side. How much would YOU listen to a pro-Israeli saying "those dirty little terrorists have again caused the death of 1000 children" compared to a person saying "1000 children have lost their lives in the Israel-Palestine conflict".

In the Israel-Palestine discussion some words have become code words to include all the antisemitism, and should thus be avoided in order to avoid misconception (here being, that you are an antisemite), and those are Zionism, Israel lobby and IOF (Israeli Occupation Forces. The correct name of Israel's army is Israeli Defense Forces. You don't need to agree, just use the correct abbreviation.). (I can't remember more right now, but I will add them, when I encounter them.)

If you cannot say what you have to say without using these words, then what you have to say is probably not worth saying - or it's antisemitic... >:->

6) Say what you have to say by changing the words you use of states, nations, nationality, ethnicity, religion etc. from Israel, Jewish, Israeli, Jew, Judaism to something that you are very passionately for. Like Palestine, Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and see how you would feel if someone pro-Israeli would say the same about Palestine and Palestinian. If you would feel OK with that version, OK with the chosen words etc. then say it. If you feel any uneasiness or suspicion, change some words.
Really, if you could say what you say about Israel-Palestine conflict about any other conflict on this planet (and there really are several going on all the time) without feeling that that way of saying things sounds prejudiced or bigoted or racist, go ahead. It probably is all clean of antisemitism.

But if you think the Israel-Palestine conflict is DIFFERENT than the rest of the conflicts on this planet, or that Israel is in any way DIFFERENT from all the other states on this planet, then you probably are at least somewhat antisemitic.  

If you STILL find it hard to understand how to criticize Israel without antisemitism, here's more pointers: How to Criticize Israel Without Being Anti-Semitic

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Some things I don't understand...

I have been taught that when two parties fight, the blame is on both of them.

I have been taught to doublecheck, verify, question everything, search for more information, and not just believe everything I read on the internet.
People have agendas. People use propaganda. People lie. People deceive.
Some do it intentionally, some unknowing.
People share stories they have heard the way they understood them.
People share snippets of information and try to understand the world using these pieces as pieces of a puzzle.
People have theories and try to fit the data to support those theories.
People have beliefs, people have triggers, people have shadows, memories, baggage, filters.
People are wearing, if not pink glasses, then some kind of shades or glasses, that color everything they see, and make some things invisible and some things claring.
People make conclusions and then share these conclusions, and they might be correct and they might be not.
That sometimes the majority is right, and sometimes wrong. That the fact that "everyone says so", doesn't say anything about the veracity of the claim.

I have been taught that everyone is innocent until proven guilty; that it's better to let a crook walk than hang an innocent; that nothing is simple and self-evident - that we cannot know why people do things they do, because we are not those people, and we don't even know why WE do the things we do. That in order to be able to judge someone, one must walk in that person's boots. I have been taught that everything is connected. EVERYTHING is connected with everything else. We cannot just lift up one event in the history of mankind or individual human beings and use that to explain anything.

I have been taught that all the people are people, equal, react the same way, have the same principal values etc. That human brains are hardwired to work in a specific way, and they do, in every human being. I have been taught that this human quality is stronger than any cultural, ethnic, religious or other form of conditioning. That there might be individual differences, but as a group, humans are alike.
For example, most parents love their children, and children love their parents.
Life is precious.
One may not harm living beings that are weaker. A child's life is more precious than an adult's life.
People do what they think is the best for the group they belong in, and the size of the group starts with this planet and everything living on this, and then gets smaller and smaller, from humankind and nation to family and oneself.

Now, what I cannot understand is, how do people who agree on these theses to be true in most other events and circumstances, suddenly stop believing in this when the even and circumstances is Israel-Palestine conflict? So much so that they would rather stop talking to you all together than trying to understand how you see the situation.

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

More whining

When you "repurpose" furniture - take something old and give it a "face lift", "make-over", restore it, what ever you call it, the idea is to take something that isn't very nice - perhaps never were - and make it useful, beautiful, nice.

There are hundreds of crafty ladies out there, taking something old and making something new and nice from it. I think it's wonderful and amazing, really, that these women take something worn out, with chipped veneer, broken bits - or something boring and rather ugly, like pine furniture from 70's, when "rustic" made "baroque and not in a nice way".

I like most of the things done here: reuse, repurpose and upcycle

Like this one:

It's a real pity that who ever had the side board before, didn't take care of it, but in this case, the renewing has succeeded, and one can still enjoy the beautiful woodwork.

But when these ladies take something that has only the fault that it's old, or that it's wooden, and the lady in question wants to paint everything, and that means that she covers beautiful wood intarsia or grain with thick layer of paint - or even worse, practices all kinds of painting techniques, like fake wood grain or marble; cracking paint or "aging", "antiquing", "distressing" with different methods... 

Here are some of my favorite NO! moments.

Take a rather beautiful wooden coffee table, paint it cobolt blue and add fake - and not especially nicely done - wood graining in black in the middle. Yikes.

 This just makes me really, really sad. :-(

This one... well... she didn't ruin anything beautiful, but the outcome looks pretty awful, I think.

This makes me angry.
Sure, the veneer is chipped, rather badly in one place, but there are ways to fix that. The wood grain is really beautiful, and the color is wonderful.

Rocking chair - what bothers me with this is that when she ripped off the old upholstery, she didn't bother looking carefully how it was done, so her new upholstery doesn't look neat. Also, I hate the use of burlap. The paint job isn't that well made either.

Friday, April 19, 2013

"Obama's Matriarchal America..."

A couple of days ago, I found out about a German family who applied for AMNESTY in USA, because Germany doesn't allow homeschooling without a good reason. (That you want to be in control of indoctrinating your children is not a good reason.)

This family is not persecuted.

Getting fines for BREAKING THE LAW is fully normal and acceptable.
Getting other consequences FOR BREAKING THE LAW, as defined by the said law, which in this case means taking over the custody of the children, as the parents are, in fact, denying them their rights.

What they are trying to present as religious persecution is in fact being treated like everyone else in the country.
"In the last two decades the socialist governments in Europe are trying a different approach: While Christian worship on Sunday morning is kept legal, any practices for the rest of the week that are based on the convictions of Bible-believing Christians and the Biblical worldview are declared against the law. The laws in most European countries in essence are designed to extinguish any Christian practice while de jure allow Christian worship in designated places.

Prime examples of this, of course, are the laws in quite a few European countries against Christian homeschooling. Christian homeschooling, note that, because Muslim or any other form of homeschooling, or even unschooling is left alone. The situation with the legal persecution against Christian homeschooling families in Germany is all too well known to most American Christian families thanks to the decision of the Tennessee Judge Lawrence O. Burman to grant asylum to the Romeike family earlier this year for the violation of their rights to homeschool their children by the German government. Less known are the laws in other European countries like Sweden and France, where homeschooling is forbidden by law. In many places in Europe it is against the law to act as a Christian in your everyday life, and that includes also the economic and political life of the nation."
- Missionaries and the theology of resistance

That is not true. People are totally free to go to church at any day they so wish. Bible study groups and Christian communities have frequent meetings that are not disturbed or hindered in any way or manner. Churches have meeting rooms, day care, children's and teen's clubs and other activities during the week, and Germany has a full freedom of religion. Everyone is allowed to practice their religion as they wish AS LONG AS THEY FOLLOW THE LAW, which means that I can't see any problems with "living as a Christian". On the contrary.

It is very much easier to live a practical Christian life in Europe than any other sort of religious life.
The Jews, Muslims and Pagans are very much more persecuted and hindered to live their lives as their conscience demands, and in many cases even TRULY persecuted. Churches, Christian meeting spaces and cemeteries are very seldom if ever attacked and vandalized, whereas the Jewish, Moslem and Pagan such are constantly being disturbed. Especially the Jewish ones. It is so common, people don't even much react, just sigh and clean it up.

Germany has freedom of expression, press and right of assembly. There are laws against hate speech that are stricter than in USA, but I can't imagine any Christian publication being censored. Now, of course, if it is hate speech disguised as Christianity, that's a different issue, but I HOPE  any Christian would consider hate speech very un-Christian, and would not protest the limitation of such. Christian publications are not censored, and the writers may freely express their disliking of such subjects like New Age or Islam or Atheism.

"“Because Germany banned individual liberty for everyone, it’s okay. . . . [So by extension] it’s okay to repress everyone’s freedom of religion, which is to say it would be okay to repress everyone’s freedom of speech, to repress everyone’s freedom of parents. All those things are implicated in the right to educate.”"
- Michael Farris, founding chairman of HSLDA
They haven't banned individual liberty from anyone. There is no such thing as "freedom of parents" or "[parents'] fundamental right to decide how [they] want to teach [their] children". Naturally, parents have rights and responsibilities, but the state's responsibilities for the children outweigh the parent's rights. I know this is hard for some people to accept, practically impossible, but this is the reality and the way it is.
I do hope no-one has any objections to when this illusional "parent's right" is being surpassed because the parents let the children starve, abuse them, molest them - but to the state all the parents are equal. It doesn't matter if all your friends think you are a perfect parent, it doesn't matter if your Holy Book or God says you are doing right, the state MUST interfere if you are denying your child any of the "Children's Rights".
(Now... USA has not ratified the Convention of the Rights of Children... why is that? Could it possibly be because you believe the parents have more rights than the children, and children in fact BELONG to their parents? You're wrong, you know. And one day your children will know it, too...)

Now, home-schooling has been illegal in Germany since 1918. Any form of homeschooling. Muslims are not allowed to homeschool either, nor any other group of people. Homeschool is illegal. Period.

Christians are not singled out in some war against Christianity. I don't even know where the idea of that "it is against the law to act as a Christian in your everyday life" comes from. (Perhaps the reason is that the author is Hungarian, and as Hungary was Communist, Christianity WAS forbidden. I can only assume he is referring to that reality, which is the COMMUNIST reality, NOT EUROPEAN.)

No, these people are not persecuted. They are trying to demand "rights" that are against the law of the country they live in, and when this request is denied - naturally - IT IS AGAINST THE LAW - they start whining about being persecuted and requesting asylum!


I don't understand which part of this is so difficult for the thousands of idiots, defending this family, to understand. I'm pretty sure most of them would scream against "illegal immigrants", who, of course, are all Mexican, or thereabout. Hello! THIS FAMILY IS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! They were requesting asylum for wrong reasons, and they were granted the asylum by wrong reasons, they are in USA ILLEGALLY. 

The worst thing with this is that because some idiot (that would be HSLDA attorney Mike Donnelly) told them to request asylum, they probably are no longer welcome as ORDINARY IMMIGRANTS to USA.
They should have requested a visa and green card to move to USA. They should have immigrated to USA legally. All their thousands of homeschooling, Christian, USonian friends should have guaranteed them work and housing, so that the government would have had no problems what so ever to welcome this German family to USA, and then in couple of years, they could have applied for citizenship.
But NOW they are criminals. Violating BOTH the German law AND the USonian law.

Homeschooling is not illegal in USA, but immigrating under false premises is. 

That the US law is different from German law is totally irrelevant. This family is German and subjects to the German law, not the US law, even though they at the moment reside in USA. (Illegally, I might add.)

That a person can get an adequate education at home, and these parents were not denying their children education, is 100% irrelevant.  Homeschooling is still illegal in Germany.

Homeschooling is NOT a human right, education is, and Germany gives an adequate education to all German children in public schools.
I think I should add that there are Christian public schools in Germany too, if the regular curriculum doesn't agree with your preferences and values.

Also, nothing stops you from providing ADDITIONAL education at home to your children.
Nothing stops you from requesting special license to skip the sexual education (which is really only a couple of hours, if even that, of the whole 10 years of public school.). I haven't heard that anyone had had any problems with this.
Nothing stops you from reviewing the material, and going through it with your children and explaining to them how it differs from what you believe, and teach your children those things as you believe them.
You can request that your children are not to read certain books; that they are allowed to choose something else they read.
You do have quite a lot of control about how and what your child is being taught, even when you don't homeschool.
So, no, this German family - or others like this one - has no case. They are just being obstinate, for no good reason.

Especially remembering what the Bible says about this issue...
Romans 13:1-5

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

Titus 3:1
"Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work"

1 Peter 2:13-17

"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."
It doesn't matter what their personal preferences are. It doesn't matter if the law somewhere else is different. It doesn't matter they would like it to be differently. Homeschooling is illegal in Germany, that is the law, and it is to be respected. 
"The German Supreme Court has ruled that it wants to 'counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies,' Farris explained. 'And that's a direct quote.'"

Yes? Of course you find it horrible, because you are thinking that they are targeting Christians. What they are targeting is actually groups like Nazis and Nation of Islam. "Parallel society" is underground movement, terrorists, saboteurs, revolutionaries, people who refuse to follow the law of the country. Does that sound like Christians to you?
What was it the Bible said about respecting the laws of the people one lives among?
Are you really trying to tell me you SUPPORT insubordination? And not only SUPPORT, YOU ENCOURAGE IT!

If Germany was demanding the Christians to denounce Jesus and worship Asir or bring sacrifice to the World Tree, then I would understand why you would protest.
If Germany demanding abortion and forced the children to have sex in school, I would understand.
This I do not understand.

Another thing I noticed in several of these sites trying to talk for this family staying in USA is that this public education law was created by Nazi government so that children could be easier brainwashed.
This law of general and equal public education was signed 1918. Germany was not Nazi 1918. The National socialistic party didn't even exist at that time! 

The thing, that is more important here, is that to refer to the Nazi Germany is "playing the Nazi card". It is bad argumentation, fallacious logic AND A PERSONAL ATTACK.
And what does the Bible say about that?

Romans 1:29-30

"Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents"

Proverbs 6:16-19

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
Nevertheless, it is 100% irrelevant why, when and by whom this law was signed, it is still the law and if you refuse to follow the law, you are a criminal.

Read this too.
Why HSLDA is Wrong about Romeike v. Holder
"But the case goes far deeper than the right of asylum. Homeschooling is providing an increasingly viable alternative as the ranks of adults with college education increases, the quality of public schools drops or stagnates, and the refusal of government schools to offer any sort of values education. The number of homeschooled students has risen from 1.5 million in 2007 to over 2 million in 2012 and is growing ever more rapidly"
- Dick Morris

It doesn't matter at all, that less than 2% of USonian children are being homeschooled, and the USonian public schools are not very good. It has nothing to do with the education in Germany, nor the FACT THAT HOMESCHOOLING IS ILLEGAL IN GERMANY.
You decide about the laws IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY, and let the other countries decide over their business.
Considering that Germany has better schools than USA, and more effective education. USA really has very little to say about how we deal with education here in Europe. Perhaps to countries like Greece or Slovenia, but we North Europeans are a lot better than you are in this.
(And, yes, one reason for that is an equal and general education. I bet your homeschooled kids do well in Bible knowledge, but if they know as much as the adults do, I have to say that it's not much. I, a Pagan, know the Bible better than any of the Christians I have discussed.)

US 17th In Global Education Ranking; Finland, South Korea Claim Top Spots

And isn't there some idiot blaming Obama and feminism for this!

"Education is at the bottom in Obama's Matriarchal America. The usa spends lots of money on vocational training. Also many americans view education simply as a means to a "better job". There is little interest in engaging education to help further humanity or to cultivate critical thinking and analysis. in addition, many people are bragging about the 'female boom' in college attendance and graduation. Though at the expense of males who are deliberately being passed over by university admissions offices. I find it ironic that with the increase of female college graduates. The standards continue to fall and the usa's ranking plummets as well. So interesting. I wonder what kind of society these people believe will come from a population in which the females are 'educated', yet the males are not. Seems like the making of civil war and perhaps even a real gender war. Such interesting times we live in indeed."