A possible sociological/psychological experiment occurred to me as a result of a passing comment made by my son-in-law, Ben Merkle. He, of course, is not responsible for any mayhem that might occur as a result of somebody actually trying this.
We hear a lot about “triggers,” and how they are used to shut down political and cultural disagreement, particularly on college campuses. Someone might be going to say something on the other side of campus with which a snowflake might disagree, and this sets off a fit of the vapors, along with massive protests against whichever visiting culprit it might be.
What we need is for some enterprising grad student in sociology or psychology (someone who didn’t want to graduate anyway for some reason) to walk through the protesting crowd with a survey, asking them for a list of the last three movies they had watched. When he has a solid representative list, he should rank them in order of popularity, and then comb through those movies for possible triggers.
The point of the experiment, of course, would be to demonstrate the discrepancy between triggers that don’t work when it is entertainment and which do when someone else’s right to free expression is at stake.
I suggest this merely because it would be festive.
It’s brilliant!
The left excels at exploiting traditional values that they don’t hold. Here they’ve weaponized politeness. It works because we are polite. Google “Sod off, Swampy” to see how well it works against people who don’t have this handicap.
Now that you mention it, the Clinton administration was pretty “entertaining” ????
How bad is it when only the “greed” of producers triggers social gustice weasels ?
First they came for the visiting lectures, then they came for the movies . . .
And here I was, rejoicing that phrases like “grab them by the ….” were going to be consistently vilified going forward, and what does Obama do? He invites Chance the Rapper to the last White House state dinner of his administration.
Please, Fox News or somebody, have Chance the Rapper on so he can explain to us why Trump’s “locker room talk” was so nasty.
Still continues to boggle my mind that some people think “nasty words” is what got Trump in trouble.
Luke 12:1-3 is what has both candidates in trouble!
????????
I think what has both candidates in trouble might start with Mark 1:1, at least, and keep going through “Amen”.
Jonathan wrote:
Perhaps Jonathan can’t see that a double-standard is what got Trump in trouble.
Is Trump an arrogant, loose-mouthed clown, and unrepentant adulterer? I won’t dispute it. But so is Bill Clinton, and the media told us that we shouldn’t care, and to mind our own business.
jigawatt nails the hypocrisy, and Jonathan simply falls into his scolding SJW role. jigawatt said nothing in defense of Trump. Hillary has said a lot in defense of Bill.
I’m wildly confused, because you were alive and I believe an adult during the Lewinsky scandal, and seem to be unaware of the massive media attention it received. Or that Clinton never again faced election after that, and almost certainly would have had problems if it had come out before his first election. Everyone knew Trump was an adulterer long before the video. He bragged about it in his books and in public appearances. But while bragging about adultery should be deeply upsetting for Christians and never minimized as supposed, “locker room talk”, it wasn’t even the biggest problem. As… Read more »
“L’hypocrisie et l’hommage que le vice rend à la vertu” – La Rochefoucauld
Proverbs tells us that the accomplice to a thief hates his own life and will not testify in court. Hillary fits that perfectly because she would expose her own infidelity. “Hypocrisy is a less destructive offense than the open and proud belittling of good.” Jonathan Murder is extremely destructive and so far Trump hasn’t murdered anyone yet. If you read Africa news, the groups that Hillary supports and takes money from murder or enslave Christians on a frequent basis. Hillary supports wholesale abortion which is murder and wants Christians to pay for pagans sacrificing their children at the alter of… Read more »
Jonathan wrote: For me, the “difference” is this: Has Clinton ever said that adultery was okay in marriages, or that it was no big deal? Has Clinton done anything in regards to her husband’s adultery that you wouldn’t expect many wives to do in such circumstances? Has Clinton ever bragged about adultery in public like Trump has and tried to normalize and celebrate it? Has Clinton ever bragged about being able to sexually harass women without their consent? For someone who is supposedly so upset about imaginary defenses of Trump by jigawatt, it is astonishing to watch Jonathan hold forth… Read more »
Katecho, how did she get him set free when he pled guilty and was sentenced to jail? Just pointing out that your facts here seem to be off. You didn’t get this argument from a meme, did you? http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/ Again, I don’t know what any of this has to do with anything. What about Clinton’s conduct here do you believe has been supported by Christians or shows a public support and encouragement of sin among Christians? Do you believe that because of Clinton’s statements made in private, Christians have been rushing to take positions as public defenders so that they… Read more »
Jonathan wrote: Katecho, how did she get him set free when he pled guilty and was sentenced to jail? Just pointing out that your facts here seem to be off. I did say “set free” when what actually happened was that his original first-degree rape charge was pled down to the point where he only served another 10 months in jail. He wasn’t “set free” as I had recalled. I appreciate that correction. I got that wrong. However, the central point, which Jonathan managed to ignore, is that, in the context of women who are sexually abused, Hillary has bragged… Read more »
I think an interesting side point here is to wonder if it is possible to become a defense attorney and still retain one’s humanity and moral sense. Lately I have been reading quite a bit about the problem of the sex trafficking of children across the southern border, and the statistics and case histories are both horrifying and sickening. As I was reading, I noticed that every so often an entry would appear for a legal office that defends against charges of sex trafficking. I understand theoretically that even the most heinous offender is entitled to a legal defense, but… Read more »
Yeah, I get that. I have an attorney friend who runs an NGO that works with girls vulnerable to sex trafficking. His entire life is built around defending those girls and he’s incredibly compassionate, so for some reason I associated him with “defense”, and was surprised to find that he had chosen to be a prosecutor before running the NGO full-time. He told me that as a prosecutor, it was actually easier to be compassionate, take the defendant’s circumstances into account, seek God’s justice, etc. As a defense attorney, you’re just basically required to reflexively defend the defendant and it’s… Read more »
I know. I have just recently become aware of the huge problem of sex trafficking in girls and women, and I think it is going to have to be my new crusade. A police officer wrote that it is much more lucrative for the cartels to traffic girls than to traffic drugs, the chance of being caught is small, and the penalties are trivial. As he said, you can sell a gram of coke only once, but you can sell a 12-year-old any number of times. If any of the NGO’s need writers, I am all theirs.
I’ve been involved in that world for twelve years, and (for now) I have one big piece of advice. Get involved in prevention or aftercare. So many NGOs and books and such are focused around enforcement and raids. That’s where the “glory” is, that’s where it’s easy to get a great story. But I honestly think that’s by far the least important focus. We’ve already seen how well the War on Drugs worked. Many of the places that provide aftercare for these girls are badly staffed or badly underfunded. Most government facilities are terrible alternatives. What good is a raid… Read more »
I can see sense in a lot of what you say. But the cooperation between our local gangs and the cartels is worrisome and can’t be ignored. And I do think law enforcement has a role to play in limiting demand. If the people who hire these trafficked minors were prosecuted more fully, it would not be quite so casual a thing to pick up a 15-year-old hooker at a Cowboys game. My reading has shown me that there is indeed little aftercare. Many of these girls can’t return to Central America where they will be rejected by their families.… Read more »
I’m all for ensuring a basic level of certainty in enforcement of the issue. It should go unaddressed by the police. In many places, this basic need is being addressed. Many moons ago when I was training young people into service, I did a module on human trafficking awareness, and for the final day brought in the LAPD representative in charge of human trafficking cases for the region. From the stories she told, it was clear that like all crime, there is a great deal that goes on without being caught, but it also appeared that the department was committed… Read more »
What you say makes a lot of sense. With depravity on one hand (demand) and extreme poverty and misery on the other (supply) coming together to create this filthy trade, law enforcement will be an incomplete response. Has much aftercare work proven effective? With migrant girls, there would be so many issues–medical, educational, psychological–to be addressed.
I don’t know anything about aftercare in the States. But I’ve seen it work in other countries, so I’m certain it could work with American resources. The most important thing is having a full, qualified team to address the myriad issues that come up – like you say, spiritual, counseling, professional psychological care, education, work skills, and social integration.
Katecho, where do you get the idea that Clinton “knew the man had forcibly raped a 12 year old girl”? She never said such a thing, she had no way of knowing it, and the case was far more complex than that. http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/ WHAT’S TRUE: In 1975, young lawyer Hillary Rodham was appointed to represent a defendant charged with raping a 12-year-old girl. Clinton reluctantly took on the case, which ended with a plea bargain for the defendant, and later chuckled about some aspects of the case when discussing it years later. WHAT’S FALSE: Hillary Clinton did not volunteer to… Read more »
Jonathan wrote: Katecho, where do you get the idea that Clinton “knew the man had forcibly raped a 12 year old girl”? …because the man passed a lie detector test and professed innocence, there was no way for Clinton to “know” that forcible rape had occurred. It’s ironic how eager Jonathan seems to be to believe the very polygraph result that Hillary herself says had destroyed her faith in their reliability. In spite of Jonathan’s desire to accept the testimony of the accused man, Hillary clearly didn’t, and that is sufficient to make my point. Even if we just grant… Read more »
But she didn’t get him off. You already acknowledged your error there. Which already shows that you had poorly understood the interview. Yes, it is clear that she thought he was guilty of a sexual crime, despite the polygraph. And she had him plea guilty of a sexual crime. How you are able to insist that she also knew he was guilty of forcible rape, you still haven’t made the least bit clear. And it’s hilarious that a 45-year-old case involving the fact that Clinton acted as a defense lawyer for a defendant that she didn’t want to defend somehow… Read more »
Jonathan wrote: But she didn’t get him off. You already acknowledged your error there. Which already shows that you had poorly understood the interview. Apparently Jonathan hasn’t been paying attention. I only acknowledged that he was not simply set free, but I quoted Hillary specifically saying that she “got him off” in the interview. From the audio interview linked to on the snopes website that Jonathan provided, Hillary said: “Got him off with time served in the county jail, he’d been in the county jail about two months.” Maybe Jonathan needs to go inform Hillary that she is in error,… Read more »
I’m still amazed at the degree to which you distort the statements of the people who hold a different opinion of you, while expressing umbrage at the most minor things which you feel are a miscasting of your own statement. Your entire rant here is claiming that I am showing partiality and siding with the victim. That I’m engaged in “identity politics” because I have criticized how Pastor Wilson treated a sex abuse victim. Yet I haven’t. I haven’t said a single word about the appropriateness or inappropriateness of her actions, except to mention that, in general, sex abuse victims… Read more »
“You want actual insensitive, take a look at how Pastor Wilson has spoken about and even gotten into the personal lives of sexual abuse victims from his own church in a public way on the internet.” Jonathan, Wilson posted after he was viciously attacked by others with loud mouths and incorrect information. He did not post or talk out of school before others blew the matter up into an international furball, but rather responded in attempts to show the truth of the matter not the lies promulgated by others. PS Snopes lies calling truth false and false truth while Hillary… Read more »
He could have chosen not to publicly respond at all, which would have been much more appropriate than what he did. Or, he could have chosen to respond to anything regarding his OWN behavior, but there were many points at which he very easily could have said, “What happened to her was horrible, she was the victim here, I don’t agree with some of the complaints that she has but out of sensitivity to her situation I am not going to discuss the details of her abuse privately.” He didn’t do that. He attempted to cast her abuse in a… Read more »
There is also the issue that I am FAR more concerned about truth, moral good, and the removal of hypocrisy in the Christian community than among politicians, whom I’ve mostly given up on. Trump is one man. Clinton is one woman. Their moral purity is nothing compared to the direction of the church as a whole. And my greatest fear with this election is that many people have worked to purposely minimize all sorts of sin and evil for the purpose of supporting the candidate they want to elect. Not just saying, “I’ll hold my nose and vote for him,… Read more »
Jonathan wrote: And my greatest fear with this election is that many people have worked to purposely minimize all sorts of sin and evil for the purpose of supporting the candidate they want to elect. I think where Jonathan got off the rails was his first assumption that I want to minimize Trump’s sins, or that I want to elect him as President. I don’t want to do either. I’m persuaded that Trump is as personally immoral as Hillary says he is, and probably worse than she knows (and vice versa). If Jonathan thinks that I’m “holding my nose for… Read more »
Here are the relevant words of Pastor James McDonald, from Trump’s own Advisory Council, who I doubt you can honestly regard as a hypocrite on this issue: Mr. Trump’s comments released yesterday—though 10 years ago (he was 60)—are not just sophomoric or locker room banter. They are truly the kind of misogynistic trash that reveals a man to be lecherous and worthless—not the guy who gets politely ignored, but the guy who gets a punch in the head from worthy men who hear him talk that way about women. I have a wife of 33 years, a daughter, and 2… Read more »
Jonathan, can you please succinctly summarize what I meant in my original comment? I think there might be a disconnect going on here.
Jonathan wrote: Note that jigawatt did two of the 3 “deficient” excuses that McDonald focuses on, but you, Katecho, want to pretend that it was somehow not a defense at all. Pretend? I see no excuses or defenses of Trump in jigawatt’s comment above. Jigawatt was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the left and the media. Jonathan needs to do more than just make empty accusations. Jonathan wrote: … the “horror” of Obama inviting a young black rapper who you’d (and I’d) never heard of to sit in the crowd for a White House dinner because his dad used… Read more »
Petes Dragon
The Secret Life of Pets
Jungle Book
Lots of triggers there. A lot of cultural appropriation – pet culture, indian culture, dungeons and dragons culture.
Both sides are obsessed with triggers: for the right, it’s gun triggers and keeping hold of them; for the left it’s imaginary insult “triggers”.
Every self respecting gun nut knows trigger discipline: you don’t touch the trigger until you’re on target and ready to shoot.
We don’t pick or create triggers, or use them as an excuse to be a whiny sad sack. When Donald Trump mocked the reporter who has a disability, it brought up memories I’d worked so long to put behind me. My own father mocked and criticized me from early adolescence through my early 20’s for behavioral struggles and problems that were out of my control (I was given various vague diagnoses until I was 20, because recognition and awareness of Asperger’s syndrome took a while to be more extensive and accepted). When I saw and heard Trump’s sneering, baiting mockery,… Read more »