Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

[Vecr]

This is somewhat found cross culturally. Transgenderism (I use that term loosely) has appeared in many cultures all over the world throughout history, for many different reasons which homosexuality is one of, and as far as I know each one either men becoming women, or men becoming a third gender that has feminine aspects, which is specifically found in NA indigenous populations (two spirit, although that is another broad term) and India (third gender im not typing the Sanskrit name), but also in the Ancient near east, mesoamerica, and more.

I don't know man, are you sure "two spirit" isn't a polite name for "flaming gay queer homo"?

 

[Moral Decay]

I don't know man, are you sure "two spirit" isn't a polite name for "flaming gay queer homo"?

Ah, I think I understand what the Indians meant by "two spirit:"

 

[Carmen The Aids Rabbit]

I don't know man, are you sure "two spirit" isn't a polite name for "flaming gay queer homo"?

Why two spirits even? Isn't a man and a woman also two spirits? Why is the term only applied to faggots?

 

[Gilgamesh]

Why two spirits even? Isn't a man and a woman also two spirits? Why is the term only applied to faggots?

I said in my original post that “two-spirit” is a broad term because in part it is a modern umbrella term supposed to encompass many different North American conceptions of gender, but it is also a bastardization and butchering of the concept, as they ignore how it was treated in different cultures and just compare it to transgenderism, which it can’t be. The reality is no one will probably ever know fully how these cultures think of gender without living in them, and many of these cultures are extinct.

 

[JJLiautaud]

I said in my original post that “two-spirit” is a broad term because in part it is a modern umbrella term supposed to encompass many different North American conceptions of gender, but it is also a bastardization and butchering of the concept, as they ignore how it was treated in different cultures and just compare it to transgenderism, which it can’t be. The reality is no one will probably ever know fully how these cultures think of gender without living in them, and many of these cultures are extinct.

Its also fucking fake and gay(literally):

https://www.stoneageherbalist.com/p/the-origin-of-two-spirit-and-the

 

[Gilgamesh]

Its also fucking fake and gay(literally):

https://www.stoneageherbalist.com/p/the-origin-of-two-spirit-and-the

It certainly is a new term representing a new concept but they try and mask it behind legitimate traditions that only appeared in a select few indigenous societies in North America.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

It certainly is a new term representing a new concept but they try and mask it behind legitimate traditions that only appeared in a select few indigenous societies in North America.

Those traditions were fairly universal. That's why crossdressing Indian sodomites are reported by Spanish explorers on numerous occasions in many different areas, and then by 19th and early 20th century anthropologists in many more areas. It's like how Indians nigh-universally believed in appeasing animal spirits and tree spirits and shit. Their cultural assumed any dude who wanted it in the ass must be in some form a woman.

 

[Ferrari Lamborghini]

I checked the last couple pages and nobody has commented on this yet.

The wikipedos have bent their rules enough to delete the famous Trump photograph from the article about the assassination attempt by making an entirely separate article about the photograph in question and claiming that the photo is unrelated to the assassination attempt. This happened on July 20th.

 

[General Emílio Médici]

The desperation to pretend it didn't happen is insane.

 

[Irrational member 14]

and claiming that the photo is unrelated to the assassination attempt

Do you think that the photo was needed to understand the context? I think so. There is a depiction of Lincoln as he's about to be assassinated front and center on Wikipedia's article for the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Granted that this artwork became part of the Public Domain, so the only rational explanation to why Wikipedia's grand and wise editors refuse to allow that photo of trump with his fist pumped on the article would be because of copyright issues. Though their editors are caught with their pants down and bais showing because they can't use that explanation because of how they distribute the photograph elsewhere on the website.

So.. orange man bad! Basically, their chief editors don't like him. They don't like this picture of him where he looks triumphant from surviving an attempt to end his life, so they wont give it its rightful association with the new Wikipedia article on the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.

I don't even like Trump. I think he's a megalomaniac and fool, but come on. The particular insanity or cognitive dissonance of some of Wikipedia's editors shows that in any position of authority and anywhere that humans are there will always be irrational decisions.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Do you think that the photo was needed to understand the context? I think so. There is a depiction of Lincoln as he's about to be assassinated front and center on Wikipedia's article for the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Granted that this artwork became part of the Public Domain, so the only rational explanation to why Wikipedia's grand and wise editors refuse to allow that photo of trump with his fist pumped on the article would be because of copyright issues. Though their editors are caught with their pants down and bais showing because they can't use that explanation because of how they distribute the photograph elsewhere on the website.

So.. orange man bad! Basically, their chief editors don't like him. They don't like this picture of him where he looks triumphant from surviving an attempt to end his life, so they wont give it its rightful association with the new Wikipedia article on the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.

I don't even like Trump. I think he's a megalomaniac and fool, but come on. The particular insanity or cognitive dissonance of some of Wikipedia's editors shows that in any position of authority and anywhere that humans are there will always be irrational decisions.

I agree completely. I think you show this to any sane person, left or right, and they would agree. I’m partially surprised they didn’t put it on there, because the potential Trump seether can make the argument that it looks “propagandist” or just plain comical.
It’s even more funny that they put the picture of his full ear bandage the day after. Couldn’t at least put a picture of him touching his ear after the shot?

 

[Puiko]

How do we know Trump didn't just use a hole punch on his own ear after he heard shots fired? Everyone is desperate to believe one way or the other and didn't think of the possibilities.

 

[Lone Star]

How do we know Trump didn't just use a hole punch on his own ear after he heard shots fired? Everyone is desperate to believe one way or the other and didn't think of the possibilities.

That's stupid. Clearly Trump can just make his blood vessels explode on command and he did it with his ear.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Our friend Dronebogus has actually made a thread on the Kiwi Farms talk page, with a rare moment of clarity and reason. This is older thread that never got resolved because discussions about Chris always end up closed and sometimes scrubbed from the site.

 

[George Lucas]

Wikipedia thinks snuff films don’t exist:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snuff_film

Main source is a Snopes article from 1999 LOL.

 

[Susanna]

Wikipedia thinks snuff films don’t exist:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snuff_film

Main source is a Snopes article from 1999 LOL.

The key aspect is the “for profit” thing. ISIS beheadings, Cartel intimidation videos, Ukrainian soldiers being blown up by Ukrainian drones for surrendering, or Chinese industrial accidents are all “popular” categories of watch people die, but they’re not commercialised. At most they’re briefly monetised until youtube takes the account down, but that shouldn’t reasonably count.

 

[From The Uncanny Valley]

I've speculated that Snopes did that as a halfassed way to get people to stop looking for them.

 

[BootlegPopeye]

The key aspect is the “for profit” thing. ISIS beheadings, Cartel intimidation videos, Ukrainian soldiers being blown up by Ukrainian drones for surrendering, or Chinese industrial accidents are all “popular” categories of watch people die, but they’re not commercialised. At most they’re briefly monetised until youtube takes the account down, but that shouldn’t reasonably count.

There was some evidence the Dnepropetrovsk maniacs serial killers in Ukraine were making their videos (only one of which has been seen) for snuff purposes, i.e., looking for people who would pay for them to kill.

 

[George Lucas]

The key aspect is the “for profit” thing. ISIS beheadings, Cartel intimidation videos, Ukrainian soldiers being blown up by Ukrainian drones for surrendering, or Chinese industrial accidents are all “popular” categories of watch people die, but they’re not commercialised. At most they’re briefly monetised until youtube takes the account down, but that shouldn’t reasonably count.

There have been reports of child porn where the kid is killed on-screen.

Snopes article originally said ‘for entertainment purposes’ and that had to be revised as a cope, but even that’s ignoring that Snopes just made up their own definition to deboonk something. A snuff film is any video of an actual murder, distributed for showing off that murder (the motive for distribution does not matter).

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

Well over half this articles just attacking Rick Bowman for no reason other than he wouldn't let ***** be put into Star Trek it's weird Star Trek used to be a cultural juggernaut and now it's completely and utterly irrelevant