No.5079
Do you guys think society would develop differently if male and female genitals were inside out, and women had to penetrate men with their prolapsed vaginas to suck the sperm out of the recessed urethra?
All else being the same.
No.5080 KONTRA
>>5066> Okay, you created a sentence to describe a relation between groups and objects and it immediately becomes a ground for criticism and a rallying cry to dissolve everything.What you put forward abstractly is a way of secriving what social sciences do. The social sciences you talk about assume that since it is groups that this also implies politics. There is no group without question of power for example. And where there is politics criticism is not far away. Furthermore, criticism is engrained in Western enlightenment. Economic power and ideas about social organization allowed burgis to criticize (and overturn) the ruling class (kings and clerics). If you have a problem with criticism of the present, you have a problem with the legacy of the enlightenment. You suppress the history of the occident that you cling to so dearly because muh traditions.
No.5081 KONTRA
>>5066And: there is a lot of social science that just claims to describe more or less.
No.5082
>>5080Yeah, but it's the end of history so there really is no point in critiquing anything except as a fancy.
No.5083 KONTRA
>>5080The problem is when you start criticizing for the sake of criticizing (or when you have run out of things to actually criticize so you just invent problems, see also: First World Problems).
Or, in the case of the carnism woman, to assume an air of importance and sell a book (aka "grifting").
And you using some weaksauce argumentum ab auctoritate goes directly AGAINST the idea of enlightenment (Kant: "Sapere aude").
No.5084 KONTRA
>>5080I think my personal problem lies more with my distaste towards "social critique" becoming an industry of activists. So the capitalist mode of cultural production fuels a Trotskyite permanent revolution where no goal is ever reached and everything become condemned to destruction.
No.5085
>>5078>Also isn't that the guy from the old Mission: Impossible TV series?Yes (and the 80s version), but he was also the pilot in the Airplane! films.
In fact, I don't think I know him from anything else.
Also: It's a shame they haven't really re-released the old shows, with how big the M:I films are.
I just found the original series on Amazon on DVD for 42 nazi gold and I'm thinking of pulling the plug, because I really enjoyed it. The 80s show though is only available in single seasons.
No.5089 KONTRA
>>5083Nowhere in my post did I justify any critique as a valid or important critique.
> AGAINST the idea of enlightenment (Kant: "Sapere aude").Kant is not the only thinker of the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment is more than the idea that every individual should be able to form opinions and express them. So pars pro toto doesn't work here.
What's more, I don't use the Enlightenment as an authority to justify my argument that criticism is necessary but that conservatives don't like criticism, have a problem with criticism of the societal (politcal, economical, social) organization but don't realize that things they cherish are built on exactly this criticism as a method during the Enlightenment. They neglect their own history when useful.
>distaste towards "social critique" becoming an industry of activistsIt's don't. A social critique of very different shades takes different avenues. The philanthropically sponsored activism you are probably talking about (Soros) is not new as a phenomenon and it is certainly is not the only one.
RE carnism: I haven't read further than the first paragraph of Wikipedia but I don't see it as so controversial. I think humans can eat meat and it might have certain nutritional benefits or on the other hand downsides. But that does not seem the object of the book or peole that talk about carnism. What they probably talk about is people that market steaks and certain other prepared animal parts with flashy manly symbols to people who are born with penises and want to live up to manly standards. I.e. carnism is for example about people that claim that not eating meat lets penis havers grow a vagina. It is about a belief system that centers around meat and why you should (normativity -> belief system) eat meat and what kind of meat you should(!) eat and which not (for example doggo because that is uncivilized or whatever). Eating meat is not necessary for a human to live. From being human there does not follow a necessity of eating meat. It's not like breathing. There is no airism.
No.5093
>>5089Why are you so afraid to deconstruct ideology of airism? Let's talk this through.
Bc you remind me of some pseudoprogressives who say "yes, gay marriages are fine, but transgenders - no, that's different".
No.5094
>>5093I'm not anti-science, I don't deny matter.
No.5095
More gardening and more reading. Found some Chinese stories I want to tackle. Gonna do three because one is too little, two is just eh but three is a proper number.
It's gonna be a fine summer achievement I think.
Also read some from this 50s-60s volume of "Contemporary Russian Poetry" and it was pretty eh. Though it's interesting to see the influence of Mayakovsky on them and how there are tiny hints of futurism in there too with some of the poems talking about machines and factories.
The paprika plant seems to be doing okay in the jar. The leaves regained a lot of moisture and now it's standing upright.
The tomato-branch that got torn off by the storm like a week back also started sprouting roots, so I will probably be able to plant it next weekend. One of the tomatoes on it started becoming more red so it's definitely living it up there.
One of the apple trees lost a huge branch but thankfully it didn't do any damage to the big stuff, it only hurt two flowers.
I'll just doe the essay on Tuesday night. Didn't really have the mood to do it and I was doing other stuff throughout the day. Well actually I was just lazy I think and I preferred to be outside instead of sitting in front of the computer to do it.
>>5093Airism is especially troublesome because it's yet another way us humans utterly exploit the products made by plants.
No.5096
>>5089> From being human there does not follow a necessity of eating meat. See, this is the "appeal to nature" I meant.
From being human, what necessities follow there at all? Sustenance (incl. water), sleep, and that's it, that's what you need to survive.
You don't need sex or music or humor or literature or social studies or any kind of culture at all . It's all optional, because there is no "necessity" for any of that.
And now the question: Who is to decide what is and what is not?
Especially that dumb argument about western people not eating dogs. Well, chinks do. People in South America eat guinea pigs. Indians don't eat cows, but taken together, humans eat everything, so if we do an appeal to nature, it seems that humanity is, while not necessarily based entirely upon a carnivorous lifestyle, at least shaped by the consumption of meat. And now, with the mindset of anti-vaxxers, you get people unironically taking "carnism" seriously, because their ancestors ate meat, thus even enabling them to form these thoughts in the first place. Appeal to nature!
No.5098
>>5096There is exactly zero appeal to nature to be found in my post. What I said is exactly contrary to any appeal to nature which derives a normative claim from a state of nature. What I said is that you cannot logically go from nature to normativity
which people who appeal to nature would do and that carnism is conceptualized as a reasoning. It is conceptualized as a normative (and hegemonic, hence the critique of it among other things) belief system.
>And now the question: Who is to decide what is and what is not?Ach Ernst, the question is not one only if something is necessary but why and for what, and with what consequences. "Debunking carnism" simply means that we don't need to eat meat contrary to what some people might claim. The thing is to exactly show that humans have options, that being human is more contingent than what might be claimed otherwise.
>Well, chinks do.Ok and? Carnism would not deny that, they even point to the cultural differences in normativity when it comes to meat and its consumption.
>but taken together, humans eat everything [...] it seems that humanity is [...] at least shaped by the consumption of meat.Yes and? Carnism doesn't deny that. Carnism is about a belief systems that for example entails the believe that humans are superior to certain or all animals and thus are justified (or in some cases obliged) to kill them and make use of their dead bodies in various ways.
>even enabling them to form these thoughts in the first place[citation needed]
And I don't talk about the argument that meat some millenias back made a humanly brain possible but homo sapiens that did not eat meat not being able to come up with some thoughts.
No.5099
>>5094This is what other kinds of bigots usually say.
>>5096> Sustenance (incl. water), sleep, and that's it, that's what you need to surviveNot really, but the actual problem here is that survivalism is itself a harmful social construct.
No.5100 KONTRA
>>5099>This is what other kinds of bigots usually say.Do you have anything to say?
No.5101
>>5100I don't, I'm tired of talking to air nazis (I'll call you luftwaffe from now). You need to be punched, not talked to.
👊👊👊
No.5103 KONTRA
>>5098> It is conceptualized as a normative (and hegemonic, hence the critique of it among other things) belief system.Are there any non-normative belief systems? Suppose we criticize everything, and continue criticizing everything, will we ever reach a point where we are out of things to criticize because everything is optimized to the infinite? Or will we just keep going in circles, because after B having superseded A, we need a C to supersede B, or go back to A?
But I like how you are exactly talking about Carnism as if you actually were a member of a cult.
Let's test something:
>"Debunking Scientology" simply means that we don't need to heed our Thetans contrary to what some people might claim. >Jehova's Witnesses would not deny that, they even point to the cultural differences in normativity when it comes to sins and their consumption.>Yes and? The Quran doesn't deny that.What I find a bit scary though is how fast you adopted the lingo, the logic and the sense (or claim) of validity.
It reminds me of something from the german MAD magazine from over 20 years ago; it was about highschool cliques, particularly the "PC-enviro-green clique", section "Qualifications":
>Die Fähigkeit, jedem dahergelaufenen Dödel jeden Scheiß abzunehmen, solange dieser nur einigermaßen politisch korrekt klingt. No.5104 KONTRA
>>5103
>Or will we just keep going in circlesMaybe it's a spiral?
>talking about Carnism as if you actually were a member of a cultI eat meat. I'm just not spilling the average liberal-rightwing melange of imageboards. It's amusing how irritating that is to you ngl.
>What I find a bit scaryI'm pretty sure you didn't get the argument since you think there is an appeal to nature going on.
I never heard of carnism but I know people who think you grow a vagina if you don't eat meat or soybean consumption makes you homo. So I have an example while you have nothing.
>Die Fähigkeit, jedem dahergelaufenen Dödel jeden Scheiß abzunehmen, solange dieser nur einigermaßen politisch korrekt klingtOh wie kühl, Bernd. Da war die MAD ja schon richtig weise, ja, ich will sagen vorausschauend. Mir läuft ein kleiner Schauer über den Rücken. Ich merke, wie dich dieses Magazin wohl wirklich nachhaltig in deinem kritischen Denken geprägt hat, mein Respekt hast du auf jeden Fall.
No.5108 KONTRA
>>5104>I'm pretty sure you didn't get the argument since you think there is an appeal to nature going on.Nothing in that paragraph was about appeal to nature, either you are confusing something or just trying to divert. And eating meat does not have anything to do with it, just how eagerly you are defending such a fringe concept you heard of for the very first time today, provided you're not just trolling by playing the devil's advocate.
But maybe that's just a consequence of hanging around on liberal right-wing websites. Next thing you do, you vote blue, so keep your guard up.
>Oh wie kühl, Bernd[...]Struck a nerve there, huh?
Funny enough, the MAD, at least in the early 00s (haven't read it since then, actually), was a much more differentiated and clever satire publication than the Titanic is today.
Of course you wouldn't know, but it's enough to discard any (valid) points on account of it presumably not meeting your standards of sophistication, unlike, say, the Heute Show, right?
No.5110
>>5108>defending I'm trying to _explain_ to you what they mean since it seem slike you don't but apparently, this is a futile attempt since the dominant opinion
unsurprisingly from the start has been "they crazy loonies things aint real :DDD"
>differentiated and cleverNa klar ;) ;) sonst würdest du dich ja nicht daran erinnern. Mein Respekt nochmal, dass du so kritisch bist und glaubst alles was "normal" ist ist normal. Das zeichnet echte Skeptiker vor Skeptikerdarstellern aus. Einer von den echten eben.
>Heute ShowNo, thank you. Whether it is Titanic, MAD, heuteShow or you: I generally think Germans cannot into humor and thus I stay away from german (non-)comedy.
No.5112 KONTRA
>>5109You have to go back.
>>5110You have to go back.
No.5113 KONTRA
>>5110>Na klar ;) ;)>I don't want to believe it therefore it's not trueWhat was that about futile attempt and dominant opinion and whatnot?
>and thus I stay away from german (non-)comedy.I see, explains a lot. A little heads-up: American humor isn't any better and you're not any more clever just because you are able to understand the absolute lowest common denominator language in existence. Seriously, get off your high horse,
it will you eventually whole evil fall on the feet.
No.5114
> Na klar ;) ;) sonst würdest du dich ja nicht daran erinnern. Mein Respekt nochmal, dass du so kritisch bist und glaubst alles was "normal" ist ist normal. Das zeichnet echte Skeptiker vor Skeptikerdarstellern aus. Einer von den echten eben.>>4741Lektion 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7viAzbOLeA No.5115
>>>5112No stakes in the discussion? No right to speak up.
>>5113>What was that about futile attempt and dominant opinion and whatnot?You tell me? I cannot read your thoughts. I don't think you are crazy if that is what you think I think.
You think carnism is PC stuff hence it's bad. But I'm not here to debate Carnism with you, I'm here to explain to you that eating meat and carnism is not the same thing, the latter is a belief system around the former which is, as an act, a phenomenon. This doesn't change when you have a personal problem with many more belief systems existing, which is after all irrelevant to the discussion anyway. The topic was not belief systems in general.
>A little heads-up: American humor isn't any betterNice assumption. I don't watch American humor shows either.
>it will you eventually whole evil fall on the feetThanks for the telediagnosis, doc. I will definitely take advice from somebody who thinks that MAD quote was exceptionally clever or differentiated.
No.5118
I guess the most annoying thing about the latest german autism weather event is that one of them clearly doesn't know what an "appeal to nature" is.
An appeal to nature is when you say that something is good because it is allegedly natural, or something is bad because it is allegedly unnatural.
Claiming that something is entirely culturally constructed is, like, the opposite of appeal to nature.
1 point off for that, but please do continue the exchange.
t. autism farmer
No.5119
>>5107Oh god oh dog oh no, please tell me Zizek is not aware of the NPC fetish. I don't want to see him break when he tries to deconstruct it in an act of performance art.
>>5105Your attempt at logic is miserable, please re-do your homework. You have skipped causation resolutions when arriving at the statement
>It's an arbitrary group of atomsThis is false, thus all conclusios following your premise are meaningless.
No.5120
>>5118>autism farmerWhat happens after farming? Do you use that stuff as ingredient for... something? Or do you just sell it off to the Finnish Meme Factories Oy?
No.5121 KONTRA
>>5118>Claiming that something is entirely culturally constructed isThe belief system is cultural and structures the physical act of meat consumption. If people think not eating meat makes them an unmanly pussy that will soon grow them a vagina this belief systems structures the diet of the person, namely making sure to consume a certain amount of meat in order to not become a pussy and lose in a Darwinian game.
No.5122 KONTRA
>>5115>You think carnism is PC stuff hence it's bad.Never said that. Nice assumption.
>The topic was not belief systems in general.Then why are you focusing so much on "carnism" as a belief system? You are constantly contradicting yourself.
>I don't watch American humor shows either.Oh wait, are you the Ernst with no sense of humor who instead just smiles internally while reading Thomas Bernhard?
>I will definitely take advice from somebody who thinks that MAD quote was exceptionally clever or differentiated.Nice twisting of words, but it's all there to be read: A comparison is NOT an absolute statement. I really should stop getting into arguments with people who aren't even able to grasp simplest semantics.
Also, where does that incredibly retarded strawman about "hurr durr meat unmanly" come from? I have never heard anyone say that in my life, nor have I ever even just entertained the notion that it might be like that.
But then again, thinking something like "carnism" exists in the first place is a belief system in and by itself, so it might just be their gospel.
No.5124
>>5119> moo mooWhere is my cleaver? I'll
deconstruct you into steaks, oppressive narrative.
No.5125
>>5122You said
>the logic and the sense (or claim) of validity.I presumably adopted. This logic, sense and claim of validity you connect to the MAD quote about politically correct lingo. Carnism for you is to be placed in that corner, otherwise, you would not connect it to that MAD quote.
>Then why are you focusing so much on "carnism" as a belief systemExactly, I was focusing on carnism as a belief system and tried to explain what one can imagine this belief system is like and how that might work as I imagine. Mind you, I openly admitted that I only read the first paragraph of the Wikipedia and went from there, not much more.
What has the existence of other belief systems have to do with it? It seems that you have a problem that (so many) belief systems seem to exist (and that they all can be taken under fire).
> nor have I ever even just entertained the notionMakes me think that you seem personally attacked by people saying carnism is real nonetheless because you have to defend yourself here: I'm not influenced by carnism as a belief system.
if you are not, there won't be any need to be defensive about it
>retarded strawman about "hurr durr meat unmanly" come from?I said that the opposite is true. People think that not eating meat is unmanly. I think you will be familiar with the soy boy meme?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0195666315000604https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-30417-001https://orbilu.uni.lu/bitstream/10993/55097/1/Opinion%20_%20Biden%27s%20Climate%20Plan%20Sparked%20GOP%20Panic%20Over%20Masculinity%20and%20Red%20Meat%20_%20Common%20Dreams.htmlhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0193723512472897https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/18902138.2016.1184479?casa_token=MS8hhbVpT_cAAAAA:FN3jIU9sJE7sEP4EoBczWwLrQlIZ8rDPI3Cn04_D629TlqmJmkDTMfuUHVcyzEN4kXSh9r323RsHhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31852627/I haven't read any of those, just taking a search on google scholar. You can decide for yourself if the reasoning is valid or not. I don't know how you grew up but having men at the barbeque station taking care of the meat and demanding meat on family festivities is something I'd say is normal in my family. And probably in countless other families as well. The bringing together of football and grilling meat and drinking beer. Masculine coded, I think I don't have to look for evidence as you are probably aware of that combination yourself.
Of course, you might not belong to these people. Whatever, that was never my interest pointing out.
I eat meat myself, probably way less than I did for the first 25 years of my life. I was probably consuming a lot of meat, more or less daily. While still eating meat I have no problem admitting that there might be a belief system around meat consumption. I don't need to be defensive about it, I don't feel attacked and I will probably still continue to eat meat. Something other people are not capable of in that way, and I wonder why.
>Meanwhile, in order to let everyone know they didn't support Biden or brussels sprouts, right-wing men flooded Twitter with pictures of their meat. They retweeted several pounds of unseasoned grey T-bones, raw steaks, prime ribs--often accompanied by an American beer. One popular meme echoed the National Rifle Association, saying we could take their steak from their cold dead hands No.5126
>>5125>People think that not eating meat is unmanly.This is a dangerous prejudice because it implies that for women it's fine not to eat meat.
No.5127 KONTRA
>>5125>This logic, sense and claim of validity you connect to the MAD quote about politically correct lingo. Carnism for you is to be placed in that corner, otherwise, you would not connect it to that MAD quote.Okay, let me rephrase then: You are eager to adopt it because it already aligns with your worldview or because you are prone to believing things as long as they go into a certain direction. The quote was a nice placative way of illustrating that.
Obviously it also works into the other direction, e.g. when talking to liberal right-wingers about criminal immigrants.
>What has the existence of other belief systems have to do with it?Nothing per se, but since you brought up belief systems in the first place, there were of course some questions coming up (which you didn't answer).
>Makes me think that you seem personally attacked by people saying carnism is real nonethelessNo, I am irritated by that repeated example, and by the far-fetched connections made here.
Men usually grill, therefore not eating meat it unmanly. What?
Also, those papers, I'll have to take an hour or so to properly read them, but these are funny as hell already
>The strongest meat–masculinity link was found among the Turkish men.>The weakest meat–masculinity link was found among the native Dutch.
>Hegemonic masculinity is reinforced across the four themes identified in our analysis of the mediated intersection of food and sport. >Competitive spectacle, the preoccupation with meat, the complexity of menus and food preparation, and discourses around place identity all work to distance cookery from the femininely coded domestic space of the kitchen.
>opinion piece talking about twitter
> Consequently, these sites represent middle-class masculine counter-spaces – masculine, carnivorous heterotopias where archaic, working class modes of doing masculinity (such as commodification of female bodies and excessive meat consumption) are appropriated, legitimized and sought transformed through irony, hipness and nostalgia.
>These findings are among the first to empirically verify Adams’s (1990) theory on the sexual politics of meat linking feminism and vegetarianism.
> In sum this study carefully suggests to not only take biological sex differences, but socially and culturally determined gender differences into account when studying or promoting the (non-)consumption of meat.So maybe it doesn't have anything to do with "carnism as a belief system", but with "carnism as a belief system" merely being one aspect of something bigger? Obviously only if we assume that those studies weren't conducted under a certain, rather strong ideological bias, which would make the results and conclusions rather questionable.
No.5128 KONTRA
>>5126Wouldn't it encourage women to eat meat?
See also:
Benis envy No.5129
>>5127> You are eager to adopt it I explained what carnism might mean
the alternative are jokes about cows aint real, everything is amde up, hehe they deny reality, I'm so clever and witty :DDD. I'm not somebody who actively promotes a critique of carnism as a belief system.
>are funny as hell alreadyWhat is so funny about them? Is it the made-up concepts, cows aint real :DDD?
>Men usually grill, therefore not eating meat it unmanly. What?No, grilling/meat consumption has a certain masculine codification. Take meat from (some) men and part of their masculinity is gone and they will protest, which can be seen with the article that mentions men posting their meat in order to protest a government decision/announcement, which is simply an example. I was aware that that is not a scientific article. It nonetheless is a piece of evidence that certain men associate meat with manliness. Their manliness is maintained by eating meat.
>but with "carnism as a belief system" merely being one aspect of something bigger?Maybe. I brought up an example which we talk about here and that is men that demand to eat meat because it maintains their manliness.
This was just an example, a case, of how such a belief system plays out in real life. Carnism might have other forms, but for these, you must consult the literature and not me because I don't know much about carnism.
No.5130
> people have beliefs about eating meat
They also have beliefs about breathing. For example parents could say their kid "you spent all the weekend playing videogames, go breath a fresh air". Why the fuck is airism "not a real thing"?
No.5157
>>5130>Why the fuck is airism "not a real thing"?maybe there are beliefs about breathing
have you been looksmaxxing by sleeping with your mouth closed, mouthbreather? but is it a system?
No.5160
Doctor's appointment went really smoothly. Got there early and finished early. Then I went to work. The issue is that we're running out of data to process. I'm still gonna go in for 8 tomorrow but I'm not sure I'll get paid for the whole day. At this rate I'll never fucking get a Macbook with an extra monitor.
Had two coffees and then I went off to the workshop meeting. On the tram I witnessed a Gypsy spit on the floor and I had a brief moment of internal Chuddery. I was there early so I was tasked with getting some snacks for the meeting.
It was pretty long. It wasn't just us students but also the heads of the cabinets.
We discussed the admittance procedure for next year, and the head of the workshop said that "We have to be careful to ask sensitively worded, politically correct questions, like you can't have it be political at all" and I joked that "So you mean it can't be: WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON THE FACT THAT THE IMPERIALIST BASTARDS ARE STILL OCCUPYING THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA?" in a really harsh, propagandistic tone and it was a laugh riot. Really, most of the meeting was a laugh-riot.
Really, the atmosphere was very relaxed. Some nostalgic stories, jokes and experiences with academia. It really felt like we were equals. Or even if not that, as if we were not just passive listeners of the jokes the "masters" were telling each other and us.
I found some fresh paprika finally so I will eat that for dinner now that I am home. It's so hard to come across good paprika for some reason. I hate it because it's perfect for dinner or breakfast with some bread and cheese.
Work is very soul crushing but also not as bad as I remember. I just wish I got paid finally. The quantum-money. I have money but not in the present time. In the future I have a lot.
Though for a second I felt incredibly melancholic today. Don't know why. Maybe I was just getting tired. I was just looking at some books on the shelf at college and it hit me that time's passing.
No.5205
Sinead O'Connor dead. Then again what else was she famous for apart from a Prince cover song and being batshit crazy?