[peck420]

Maybe, but I would have to say that as of right now, I disagree.

I don't think we can even begin to analyze Gen Z, because we are still stuck in a left/right paradigm.

Your article is using data collected from a two studies written by those of us still stuck in the existing paradigm, while trying to understand something that may or may not care about our existing paradigm.

Ie: We don't even know the questions to ask, to properly gauge them.

Let's use the topic at hand, for example. Claims of one side hating women, the other hating freedom, blah, blah , blah...

How do we take this and categorize how a generation where sexuality and gender may actually be fluid (as in they will most likely have technology available that will let them be men one day and women the next)? How do we do we classify freedom, when we are eager to limit or censor, and they are more than willing to share, well...everything.

They may be fiscally conservative, but shop and review via hive mind like consensus. This is capitalism and communism happening all at once.

Regardless, it sure will be exciting to watch them grow up and takeover!

As for collecting their smartphones....eek. Any group that tries that is dead. Just change the wifi password at a Starbucks and watch what happens...nobody takin their damn phones away, lol.

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Thanos Thanos:

That's more like something they'd do to me for not believing in their fairy tales and people like you would happily do all the dirty work for them.

I ask because you're clearly working yourself up to killing someone with all that hate and rage you have on board.

Pot meet kettle...

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Lemmy Lemmy:

...nor brick nor steel nor concrete nor straw.

I'd prefer to use lead.

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Thanos Thanos:

That's more like something they'd do to me for not believing in their fairy tales and people like you would happily do all the dirty work for them.

I ask because you're clearly working yourself up to killing someone with all that hate and rage you have on board.

Pot meet kettle...

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Lemmy Lemmy:

...nor brick nor steel nor concrete nor straw.

I'd prefer to use lead.

That's right, you're autistic and can't grasp sarcasm. Not that I care.

[Thanos]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Thanos, you have a demonstrated proclivity for outraging yourself at imaginary people and projected behaviors.

And you're doing it again.

I guess that's part of why I keep wondering if you're DerbyX because you sure sound like him when you get your hate on for Christians.

You seem to get fairly outraged at all this outrage you think I'm expressing. I save my mad for important things. Like some mental case shooting up a kindergarten and then internet conspiracy maniacs start harassing the parents of the murdered toddlers. Or when Vladimir Putin covers the debts of a grifter and then sets up a franchise operation at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

[raydan]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The book is an assault on Christianity...

That's like saying that Independence Day was an assault on extraterrestrials.


It's called fiction for a reason.

[BartSimpson]

raydan raydan:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The book is an assault on Christianity...

That's like saying that Independence Day was an assault on extraterrestrials.


It's called fiction for a reason.

Independence Day isn't being used to malign a sitting President or an entire religious group.

The article this topic is about is proof that a work of fiction is being used to malign the President and Thanos is using it to vent his spleen at Christians.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

You seem to get fairly outraged at all this outrage you think I'm expressing. I save my mad for important things. Like some mental case shooting up a kindergarten and then internet conspiracy maniacs start harassing the parents of the murdered toddlers. Or when Vladimir Putin covers the debts of a grifter and then sets up a franchise operation at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

If this is you just having a coffee chat then I think I'd rather not see you when you're angry.

[Thanos]

Trust me, there's no one here spazzing about anything here. Except for you. Given what religious male GOP candidates have been saying since fundamentalists took over the party there's nothing in The Handmaid's Tale that shuld offend any of them because they most likely embraced all the same ideas before the book was even written. All Atwood did was base a book around what these people had been saying since the rise of the religious right in the late 1960's. And I'll I really have to do is go back to the 2012 election and the words of Todd Akins, Foster Freiss, and Richard Mourdock to show proof of what it is these kinds of men believe in and what they will implement when they have enough control of the legal and judicial systems.

I like you. I respect you. But I'm not going to hesitate to tell you that you're doing yourself a major disservice with both the causes you're following and the people you're giving your support to. You're better than that, and better than them too. As for me, there will be no peace with these kind of people, ever, because once they're done with the females and the homos they're just as likely to turn their aim on me and on anyone else who won't go along with their claptrap.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

As for me, there will be no peace with these kind of people, ever, because once they're done with the females and the homos they're just as likely to turn their aim on me and on anyone else who won't go along with their claptrap.

If that's how you feel then I suppose you should support the right to keep and bear arms so you can defend yourself, you might want to support your freedom of speech especially against anyone who might call it hate speech, you might want to assert your property rights, you might want to protect your income from those who would steal it from you, and...well...you might want to make friends with some Republicans and Christians who feel the same way.

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Pot meet kettle...

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Lemmy Lemmy:

...nor brick nor steel nor concrete nor straw.

I'd prefer to use lead.

That's right, you're autistic and can't grasp sarcasm. Not that I care.

Had you used an emoticon - like this instance - I'd agree that it was sarcasm.

However, your 'lead' comment lacked one, so it's far more likely to be yet another example of the vicious rhetoric you spew on CKA on a regular basis.

[herbie]

$1:

The book is an assault on Christianity...

That's like saying that Independence Day was an assault on extraterrestrials.

No, it's more like saying Lord Of The Flies was an assault on civilization as the underlying theme is that it can't be arrived at without some authoritarian entity forcing it upon you. Something that seems to have been accepted as fact in every Hollywood apocalypse movie since it was written.
I can only conclude that anyone truly offended by Atwood's book holds some of those authoritarian views contained within it. Which I know most of you do, as it is a formidable example of feminist literature and you can't grasp the concept that YOU do not have say over a woman in any way.
The book was published in 1985, written just after the times when husbands OWNED their wives, forced sex wasn't rape. Just after women gained say in matters like birth control and abortion and the ERA failed. When ALL Christian sects condemned abortion, Catholics were officially against all birth control, and the politics of the times were
revisiting and restricting gains they'd made. Of course it uses extreme exaggeration of state/church/male collusion to oppress women because that's the point: Who decides for a woman, she, or everyone else?
As far as the bannings go, that shit happens. That's how you perpetuate stupidity. My kid had already read it before she got assigned it in high school.

[Thanos]

Atwood herself never wanted to be pigeonholed by second-wave feminism which is why she goes out of her way during discussions of the book to say that it's not a purely feminist story. This causes no end of frustration among the third-wave feminists of the SJW variety, many of whom essentially regard Atwood as a traitor for not giving it all for the cause.

As for the show, one of it's first scenes apparently is of men being executed by the murderous Republican Moral Majority Gilead regime, with the point being (the one Bart chose to keep ignoring) is that fundamentalist totalitarians eventually turn on everyone in due course because it's their nature to do so.

[ShepherdsDog]

Night of the Long Knives seems to be their SOP .

[BartSimpson]

Interesting that this book is being celebrated by the anti-Christian crowd as a possible future.

The fact for too many Muslim women is that it's their daily reality.

[Thanos]

Yup. Same too with Oliver Cromwell's England. And Warren Jeffs' Mormon polygamist compounds. And David Koresh's apocalypse cult. And far too many of the orthodox Jewish sects. And that's because all patriarchal monotheistic male-centric religious fundamentalist societies are absolutely nightmarish for women and for social outsiders who don't meet the standard these "godly" men have set.

You don't understand, or don't want to, going by our previous conversation. It's not a hatred of religion as much as it is a hatred of the MEN who use religion to commit every possible cruelty and depravity that they can dream of because they've claimed god as their cover to give them permanent immunity from basic social standards and from the law itself. That it's really only been in the last century where secularism has gotten strong enough to challenge these demented and evil cultists convincingly shows for how long almost all of humanity has been oppressed and tyrannized by this dark ages claptrap and hokum.