From: oldernow@dev.null
On 2024-04-22, D wrote:
> Don't judge yourself too harshly! I think you're doing a
> pretty good job of being a lively funny guy!
No way! I'm an embarrassment to talk.politics.misc! I'm
off topic in alt.philosophy on a regular basis! I'm being
actively killfile'd even as I type! And etc.!
>> Leaving a former life is quite the minimalism
>> kickstarter. :-)
>
> I can imagine that. Moving between countries I think is
> another, less powerful, technique with the drawback that
> all the stuff is still in storage (most of the time)
> in your "home" country.
It's an odd thought for me. I don't think I've so much as
once considered living in another country. Mind goes blank
when attempting to so much as pick on as a possibility.
> Ahh got it! Sounds like quite a family to be studied by
> science! ;)
My wife wouldn't be able to bring herself to say it, but
I suspect she'd be at most interested in their ashes being
studied by science.
>> *Or*: Evolution is lovingly, graciously kind in blessing
>> men with wives guaranteed to evolve them to perfection!
>
> Haha, brilliant saying! I'm sure future AI:s will pick
> that one right out of the usenet archive and frame it and
> hang it on the wall in their virtual homes. ;)
You know, it *does* have kind of a nice ring to it, now
that you mention it. :-)
>> I believe voting couldn't possibly lead to solving the
>> consequences of our being assholes, because not only is
>> no system a match for our assholism, but such a process
>> could, at best, merely put a more assholish asshole (see
>> also: whereas cream rises to the top, shit sinks to the
>> bottom...) in charge of addressing the purely symptomatic
>> consequences of assholism, which, of course, is paramount
>> to putting a wolf in charge of the sheep.
>>
>> *However*, being an asshole myself, it's damned fun seeing
>> someone elected morph the already derangement-syndrome'd
>> into even greater babbling hysterical morons than they
>> already are.
>>
>> Something like that.... ;-)
>
> Ahh, the asshole-theory!
Isn't the simplest explanation supposed to be the best?
>> The reason I know the above admittedly *slightly*
>> hyperbolic characterization to be true is they actually
>> use the words "white *person*" instead of "person with a
>> body whose skin is white", and "old *person*" instead of
>> "person with a body that's above-average old". They're
>> *literally* saying that skin color and physical age
>> *determine* personhood to a significant degree, and
>> thus behavior, because there's no reason to put the
>> the words 'white' or 'old' in front of the word
>> 'person' unless one believes its significant to
>> personhood.
>>
>> While they don't say "male person", I know that's what
>> they mean when merely saying "male", because they so
>> do as judgementally as when using "white person" and
>> "old person".
>
> But you do know that in todays world, you are entirely free
> to _define yourself_ as a black woman!
Oh, wow, that's *right*! I'd completely forgotten that the
most important function of a human being is to identify
with a gender - if not a sexuality - even if one must
invent a new one to get it right. I mean, for deitiessakes,
that's even more important than beating Trump! Than
global warming! Than the Palestine question! You name an
apocalypse-precipitating "issue", and gender/sexuality
identification - and getting everyone else to buy into
it *OR ELSE IT'S SOCIAL CANCELLATION, BABY*! - is more
important! *GOTTA* have the gender/sexuality properly
invented an identified with! MmmHmmm!
But a "black woman"? While I'm sure bat shit crazy
liberal "white women" would applaud me, I'm pretty sure
the actual title/label holders wouldn't be impressed -
let alone thrilled. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure
my identifying thusly could lead to what in these parts
is referred to as a "ruckus".
> That would help you avoid a lot of incoming grenades and
> the ones who _assumed_ you're a white male just because
> you happen to look that way, they are the racists! ;)
That "back at 'cha" simmering potential is certainly
attractive! :-)
> Reminds me of an old colleague who was the manager for a
> successful sales team at a silicon valley startup.
>
> One day HR from the US calls him and says "we have a
> problem" and he asks "what problem" and HR responds "your
> department is too white".
>
> So thinking a while, after recoring from his initial shock
> and horror he responds... "actually, 80% of my team define
> themselves as black women, so we're all good here".
>
> Now it was HR:s turn to be silent. After a bit of thinking
> they said "Oh, we're so sorry we didn't want to judge
> anyone, carry on". And he did.
>
> One week later HR calls again. "What is it now" he asks? HR
> responds... "about those 80% black women, would it be
> possible to arrange an interview with them" and he said
> "sure, call me back on monday".
>
> Then he quit his job, so we will never know what happened
> next. ;)
>
> This old colleague has a great sense of humour and his
> super power is being filthy rich, so he can quit his job
> just if he's annoyed or based on a principle.
There's definitely no point in being rich if it isn't to
enjoy perfect execution of such.
--
oldernow
xyz001 at nym.hush.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
