Totally kewl with this.

Pity more people didnt die

Totally kewl with this. ~ Crid at October 31, 2017 11:26 PM

Not sure I'm "kewl" with murder, but also not sure what choice she had, being backed into a corner like that.

Finally, someone whom the SJWs can't ignore is saying what I've been saying for months: Cultural appropriation isn't a thing!!!

Crid: Totally kewl with this.

Then, Crid, you're totally stupid. But we've known that for decades.

You know for a fact that each and every one of those eighteen people who were poisoned were complicit in forcing her to marry? Meaning that they all agreed that she should be forced to marry against her will and they had the authority to force her to do so?

I went looking for more details, since the tweet you linked provides no source material. (Quelle surprise! You gave your hearty, barking seal of approval without a single detail beyond the headline.)

I found this story which gives a bit more information.

She was in a forced marriage, she fled back to her family, who promptly shipped her right back to her husband. She served him milk, laced with poison. When he didn't drink it, she made the milk into lassi, a yogurt drink and served it to his entire extended family.

Even if you think he deserved it, I'm finding it hard to believe that each and every one of Bibi's in-laws was complicit in forcing her to marry. Were some of them women, perhaps forced to marry into this family themselves, therefore powerless to even voice their objections to forced marriages?

Why does her failed attempt to poison one person (her involuntary husband) suddenly make it "totally kewl" to poison his entire family. Were each and every one of them an accomplice to her forced marriage? Did no one extend even the slightest kindness or sympathy to her?

I don't know the laws in Pakistan, but she will likely be charged with murder, found guilty and executed. I guess that's "totally kewl," too.

There are some days, Crid, I would like to smack the stupid right out of you.

Then there are other days, like today, when I realize that would take far too long.

No, no, no! The expression "MILF" does not mean your own mother.

I wonder why they refused to mention his ethnicity or family name

It's right there, Honey.

> Then, Crid, you're totally stupid.

Patrick, it's a little late in the day for you to feign sensitivity, righteousness or clarity about mechanisms of broad social change. If the things I say offend you, don't read them... But be quiet in any case.

Althouse quotes a comment about an article in the NYTimes:

In fact, men and women tend to have different reactions to authority figures and power in general, which is the real issue here: men are generally diffident about sucking up to it, while women attempt to seduce it.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2017/10/three-tenured-dartmouth-college.html

The Other McCain on the sexual harassment apocalypse: The excrement has truly hit the rotary ventilation device.

The ruined reputations and torpedoed careers are piling up faster than anyone can keep track, and where will it end? Nobody knows, but what we do know is why this Apocalypse is happening.

Because Donald “Grab ’em by the p***y” Trump got elected.

There are layers and layers of irony here. Feminists had staked their hopes on Hillary Clinton to vindicate the wrongs they had suffered, and none of them believed she could lose to a foul-mouthed misogynist bully like Donald Trump. Alas, they hoped in vain. Driven mad by despair, they decided it was time for some vigilante justice. So they started naming names and — mirabile dictu! — these turned out to be liberal men who never expected to be targeted for the kind of merciless treatment that college boys had been facing for years.

http://theothermccain.com/2017/10/30/no-mercy-for-kevinspacey-welcome-to-the-sexual-harassment-apocalypse/

This morning: Rattner & Hoffman.

I maintain the undervalued calculation her is that being an actress (or an actor, for that matters) requires no skills, but excellent cheekbones. It's a great job because if you succeed, you'll not have done anything too complicated to have made it happen. You will have survived a challenging probability, but not a difficult work of construction or study.

So, yeah, the people at the levers of a machine like that are going to extract some value from you as you pass by. Why wouldn't they? Why would they presume there's something about you too precious to exploit?

Who GAF which actress or actor becomes successful? Another one will come along tomorrow.

Time to sell your Tesla stock.

Tesla stock set to implode, according to hedge fund president, Harris Kupperman in his Adventures in Capitalism blog.

Of course, Tesla (TSLA – USA) is something of an anomaly here. While the companies in the above list [Palm, Gateway, Research In Motion, GoPro, FitBit, Heelys, Handspring, Compaq, BlueRay, Garmin, Delorean, Casio, Sega, Tamaguchi, TiVo, Betamax, AOL, Walkman (Sony), Set Top Boxes (Scientific American), Kodak, Atari, Napster, Netscape, Polaroid, etc.], all produced prodigious cash while they were industry leaders, Tesla seems to incinerate cash while in the lead—using repeated equity and now debt offerings to plug the hole. While other companies had a huge stash of cash to fall back on when others overtook them, Tesla’s cash balance leaves it only a few quarters from insolvency.

I have to give Elon Musk credit. He has created a company that is a rather successful cult, even if it is still a failing auto company. Every time that skeptics ask real questions, he deflects them with futuristic sci-fi pronouncements. What other automobile CEO is obsessed with Mars while his assembly line fumbles along? What other CEO talks of hyperloops, while his main product on auto-pilot will kill you if used as currently designed.

When will Tesla’s stock promote finally implode? When people realize that it’s a cash incinerating vanity project for Elon Musk, at a time when new, better products are coming to the market. That point is coming soon.

Mrs. Robinson, are you trying to seduce me?

Instapundit asks:

COPYRIGHT SHOULD BE LIMITED TO 24 YEARS: CBS sues man for copyright over screenshots of 59-year-old TV show.

I mean, why subsidize an industry run by a bunch of rapists and pedophiles?

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/279809/

Oh, FFS. There's so much stupid it burns.

Having children with a partner of a different race is also problematic for Daniels:

if you’re white + forming a family w/ multiracial children + not dealing w/ your own racism or systemic white supremacy, how’s that helping?

https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/38463/

Oh, California! I thought part of the selling point for legalization was that it would hurt black market!

Buying legal marijuana in California could be pricey enough to keep the black market healthy.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/31/news/economy/california-cannabis-tax-fitch/index.html?sr=twCNN103117economy1155PMStory

I R A Darth Aggie: Oh, FFS. There's so much stupid it burns.

I was responding to her yesterday, and I'd like to think that I had something to do with her decision to set her tweets to private.

I suggested that instead of encouraging white people to worsen themselves, she might encourage minorities to better themselves. Basically, in her mind, if you're a white person raising kids of any race in a stable committed home, you're contributing to white supremacy.

And Crid, I'm sure we're all wondering what you're "totally kewl" with. The fact that she killed most of her husband's extended family, none of whom have no authority to force her into a marriage, regardless of whether they believe in forced marriage? Or the fact that she will likely be tried for murder and executed?

Do tell. What about this situation meets your enthusiastic approval?

Oh, California! I thought part of the selling point for legalization was that it would hurt black market! ~ I R A Darth Aggie at November 1, 2017 11:51 AM

You've never lived there, have you?

It's never about anything but the government taxiing it

And a 45% tax on pot sales is par for the course. After all, the state bird is a dead golden goose.

They'd legalize murder if they could tax it.

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." ~ Ronald Reagan

But, orgasms . . .

The Toxic Ideas that Enabled Weinstein and Others

I don't know about how well things will turn out for taxpayers in California, but who's to say that the black market, nationwide, WON'T get hurt in the long run? Give things time.

At any rate, I certainly expect that drug-dealing-related killings will go down.

"They'd legalize murder if they could tax it."

Mpetrie, I couldn't help noticing that the author doesn't seem to know that most people understand there's a big difference between having the right to PURSUE a sex life (in a civilized manner, of course) and having the right to sex against the will of another.

After all, despite the always-expanding right to marry whom you please (aside from the growing restrictions on teen couples) you don't hear too often of men in Western nations trying to force women to MARRY them - let alone demanding that laws be written in their support. The countries/cultures where that's still legal have existed for centuries (obviously NOT inspired by the "sexual revolution"), but they are clearly frowned upon by now - if not consistently, I admit.

And I thought this was ludicrous:

"Abortion is a 'woman’s right to choose.' But how often are women pressured into having abortions by powerful men in their lives, employers, teachers, clergymen, even their fathers, to have abortions in order to cover up the evidence of predation? We don’t really know. No one seems to think this question is worth asking."

Somehow, I doubt that most rape victims (assuming that's what she meant by "predation") WANT to give birth. And it's rarely a good idea for an underaged teen to give birth - it's a serious threat to her health, and if she's forced to give up the child, she'll suffer for life, as a rule, and if she raises the baby, there goes her future. On top of that, no one can force her to have an abortion - something the girl's parents are often shocked to find out. (No pro-choice organization supports the right of the parents to force her, to my knowledge.)

I will agree, though, that more young women these days are having sex and regretting it because they didn't want to be seen as prudes - and that that is very regrettable. I got out of that, back in the 1980s, simply by refusing even to TALK about sex whenever I didn't want to. Not so easy these days, I take it.

Just to clarify - I should have said "more young women these days are having affairs and regretting it." As in, having sex for weeks or months only to find, slowly but surely, that their "boyfriends" don't really want to be with them outside of a bedroom - or even talk, most of the time.

"As in, having sex for weeks or months only to find, slowly but surely, that their "boyfriends" don't really want to be with them outside of a bedroom"

That's sad. Are they really fat or something?

Actually, Gog, I was thinking of a real story as told by Dr. Miriam Grossman in her 2007 book "Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student." In it, the freshman patient, Heather, said she had a "friend with benefits," except she wasn't getting any friendship, while he was getting benefits.

https://books.google.com/books?id=HTAv4A9TZNEC&pg=PT24&dq="heather+was+a+nineteen+year+old+studying"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjK2Ku9tZ7XAhUl5IMKHfaODd8QuwUIKTAA#v=onepage&q=%22heather%20was%20a%20nineteen%20year%20old%20studying%22&f=false

The short paragraph immediately afterward is pretty sad too - the college girl, Olivia, had never been taught how awful it can be for a girl to break up with someone she'd actually slept with. Check out what she says.

On a more lighthearted note, when I was in college, I invited a cult gay writer (he was much older than we were) to speak on campus and he was very well received, even though I'd told very few people he was gay (the staff knew, however). Afterward, one amiable (seemingly) young man on my floor, who'd noticed how much I smiled whenever I was with the writer, said:

"You really like him, don't you?"

"Yes."

"Would you pursue him if he were your age?"

"Certainly NOT!!"

"Why not?"

"Because it would be very RUDE!"

"But you'd be doing him a favor."

I just rolled my eyes.

"is pretty sad too - the college girl, Olivia, had never been taught how awful it can be for a girl to break up with someone she'd actually slept with"

This is why I tell women to never have sex until they're married.

CHAIN MIGRATION must end now! Some people come in, and they bring their whole family with them, who can be truly evil. NOT ACCEPTABLE!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/925860866767163393

I couldn't help noticing that the author doesn't seem to know that most people understand there's a big difference between having the right to PURSUE a sex life (in a civilized manner, of course) and having the right to sex against the will of another.

Do they?
In a world where we have terms like visual rape,

where men standing outside a public restroom for all of three minutes while their daughters go to the bathroom have their pictures plasters on social media,

where men taking pictures of their own children are harassed by police

where men passed out drunk have a woman undress them and suck them off are then expelled because they used mind control to force that girl to suck on their passed out drunk dick

a world where telling woman A you like her dress in front of your wife can get you a sexual harassment complaint from woman B and get you fired

a world where talking in technical terms a half assed blogger is unfamiliar with and thinks sounds dirty can get you fired

a world where asking a woman for coffee is equated to rape

a world where a woman walking thru NYC has less than half of one percent of people talk to her considered harassment (FYI those numbers were bumped up by claims saying hello was harassment) that the entire male gender must atone for

You really think most people are of the opinion that people (read men) can purse a sex life

And more sickness . . .

Actor Roberto Cavazos Claims He Refused Multiple Sexual Advances from Kevin Spacey

And down the spiral we go . . .

Dustin Hoffman Apologizes After Being Accused of Sexually Harassing 17-Year-Old Intern

Get up, come on, get down with the sickness . . .

Six Accuse Brett Ratner of Harassment or Assault (More Trouble for ‘Justice League’)

Shooting at Colorado Walmart:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/us/thornton-colorado-walmart-shooting.html

Russia organized 2 sides of a Texas protest and encouraged 'both sides to battle in the streets'

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-trolls-senate-intelligence-committee-hearing-2017-11

Six Accuse Brett Ratner of Harassment or Assault (More Trouble for ‘Justice League’) ~ mpetrie98 at November 1, 2017 6:36 PM

First Harvey Weinstein and Rene Russo, now Brett Ratner and Olivia Munn. What is this thing with Hollywood guys trapping women and forcing the woman to watch them masturbate? At what point would anyone think a woman would find that sexy or in any way arousing?

Michelle Obama explains her troubled marriage.

I really feel her pain.

lujlp: a world where asking a woman for coffee is equated to rape
_________________________________

I will happily bet there is no such law. Kindly tell me how many such hysterical SOCIAL reactions have happened in the U.S. - where the adult population is about 250 million, just to remind you. (Using your exact terms, of course. If he tries to force her into sex because he bought her coffee, of COURSE she's going to take him to court.)

If young adults are having somewhat less sex than their parents did, it's likely more to do with their phone addictions than anything else, as recently indicated in The Atlantic. In the meantime, women can and do ask men out when they want to - or at least drop pretty strong hints, and I haven't heard of college boys being afraid to ask girls out, as opposed to asking girls whose names they hardly know to sleep with them.

Btw, Gog, I don't know how serious you are, but while it's good to warn young women how emotionally hurtful casual sex can be, it's not the same as premarital sex in general - not that that doesn't have emotional complications too. Plus, as I said at length in another thread -

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2016/12/30/link_trap_1.html

- the trouble with parents demanding that girls AND boys abstain until marriage or death is that (aside from the fact that even many religious parents don't really want/expect their sons to do that) in many super-religious communities, people who aren't even 21 often jump into hasty marriages because they're sick of waiting for sex, only to repent at leisure and find themselves stuck in loveless marriages, with or without children being involved (since divorce is usually taboo either way). Plus, the last thing their parents want (if a divorce DOES happen) is for a son or a daughter to come home with a couple of babies to feed, since most people under 25 can't support two households.

On top of that, parents are starting to wake up to the foolishness of allowing their children to stay with them, rent-free, until they're 30 or more, so if they're going to kick their son out the door at 18 or 21 and tell him he can have complete privacy so long as he never asks for money or shelter again, their daughter deserves the same policy of "don't ask, don't tell" when she leaves.

(Before the 1960s or so, it was somewhat common for girls to be taught that decent women didn't live in their own apartments until they married and they were often discouraged from going to college as well, so sociologists will tell you that many pre-boomer women got married primarily so they could Leave Home. Not ideal - but even before singlehood became acceptable for women, their parents started asking them to leave anyway, since the alternative wasn't ideal for the parents either.)

Where did I say law lenona?

I said equated, as in a woman who regularly sells naked photos of herself for money equated a guy asking her to coffee as a sexual assault, and feminists everywhere agreed

You didn't make that clear, did you?

WHO said that and who exactly agreed? How many? (With the latter, no free-lance writers, please. They don't have the power that politicians and Ph.D.s do.)

Other reports on the poisoning say that the forced-wife only intended to poison her husband. When he didn't drink his milk, his mother added it to the yogurt she was fermenting, and that's what did in nearly the whole family. That was a pretty big dose of poison for one person, but it's unlikely that the girl had ever been trained in how to calculate doses - or anything else beyond how much goat stew is needed to feed a family of 18.