From the Depths of Wikipedia

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castello_della_Pietra {Italian}

I was looking up where my family is from (Vobbia, Italy) for a personal project and came upon this. I'd love to go.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Sat Nov 09, 2013 9:42 am

It's not a biscuit, it's JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. They're STABBING JESUS! You're supposed to eat him whole. Anything else is death-penalty rude. Motherfuckers, not eating god right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

Which I guess most people have heard of, but it's way crazy-town anyhoo.

Starmaker · Post by **Starmaker** » Sat Nov 09, 2013 12:04 pm

sigma999 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_desecration

I didn't know this was "a thing"

People in Russia report [their children] being violently sick after receiving the eucharist so much it's at the top of search suggestions right after "sick in (subway) the transport, not the restaurant", with symptoms like high temperature for days, vomit and inability to eat, weakness and inability to walk, explosive diarrhea, etc. Since only nuts take children to church (normal "practicing Christians" collect holy water on Baptism, dye eggs on Easter, and hire a priest to attend a funeral), the often-repeated question is "my kid vomited out the Body of Christ and keeps vomiting out the vomit when I make him eat it, how do I exorcise the demon". The advice is "flog and isolate your kid, and pay the church to mention his/her name in a prayer". Seriously.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sat Nov 09, 2013 12:32 pm

Maj wrote:http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castello_della_Pietra {Italian}

I was looking up where my family is from (Vobbia, Italy) for a personal project and came upon this. I'd love to go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidwelly_Castle

On my dad's mom's side they're named Kidwell and they insist on being relatives of these Kidwells (Cydweli). I don't know enough about my family tree on that side to know how delusional or not that they are.

JonSetanta · Post by **JonSetanta** » Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:54 pm

tussock wrote:It's not a biscuit, it's JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. They're STABBING JESUS! You're supposed to eat him whole. Anything else is death-penalty rude. Motherfuckers, not eating god right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

Which I guess most people have heard of, but it's way crazy-town anyhoo.

I was going to post that link but you beat me to it

Crazy, crazy shit. And yet the simple concept and ridiculousness of a "blood libel" makes me laugh.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 1:09 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pitch_intervals

JonSetanta · Post by **JonSetanta** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 1:17 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

TheJerkStore · Post by **TheJerkStore** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 2:16 am

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_activism

What surprises me is that they actually say MRA's are right about some of the things they are saying. That's kind of shocking to me.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 2:34 am

Are you surprised because rationalwiki is admitting that the MRA is right about some things, or are you surprised because the MRA is right about some things?

TheJerkStore · Post by **TheJerkStore** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 2:35 am

Both are correct.

EDIT: I didn't expect MRAs to be right about anything, and even if they were I wouldn't expect a wiki as politically charged as Rationalwiki to admit it. It'd be like Conservapedia admitting something Obama is right about.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 2:50 am

I've actually been learning about men's rights because my husband is making a study of fatherhood. Neither of us meant to, but since we started, I've caught an instance or two of bias against men that I wouldn't have noticed before. One of those instances was this Pew Research article (for reasons I enumerated in the comments).

JonSetanta · Post by **JonSetanta** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 2:55 am

I suffer from these "attacks" due to longterm benzo use. Took me a while to find the right terminology, but not like the doctor will be any help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depersonalization

TheJerkStore · Post by **TheJerkStore** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:05 am

Maj wrote:I've actually been learning about men's rights because my husband is making a study of fatherhood. Neither of us meant to, but since we started, I've caught an instance or two of bias against men that I wouldn't have noticed before. One of those instances was this Pew Research article (for reasons I enumerated in the comments).

I do agree with your arguments, but it doesn't bother me too much, I still think I am happy being male. I'd prefer to deal with "People assume that I'm lazy" over "having a set of genitals that about 25% of the time either becomes incredibly inconvenient (at the very best) or incapacitates me" (more common). And that's not getting into the fact that I can go places without being hit on, or that entertainment and medical care by default is designed for me specifically, or the fact that Congress doesn't assemble a panel of decrepit old ladies way past childbearing age to make laws against my genitals, etc.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:57 am

The problem I have is that it's not just men who are penalized, but fathers. Articles like that perpetuate the notion that dads are just sitting around on their asses while women are running around like maniacs, unable to even enjoy the few moments they do have.

These sorts of myths are what contribute to the notion that dads are somehow inferior parents, and that has a whole host of consequences that people should care about. Personally, I don't believe that women will ever be able to attain equality outside of the home until men are equal within it. It has to be OK for dad to stay home with the kids when they're sick, and allow mom to work. It has to be OK for men to be better at putting the kids to sleep or changing diapers than mom. As long as society insists that a woman can be both mom and career lady, but men are mostly just there for the career with some sidekick support at home, women will be left holding the broom.

TheJerkStore · Post by **TheJerkStore** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:10 am

Also: Wouldn't the extra time women spend on personal grooming be a reflection that women have higher standards of appearance apply to them rather than the fact they do it because it's relaxing? I've seen what women have to do to even be considered "presentable", and it doesn't look like a lot of fun.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:20 am

Most men arguing on the behalf of victimized men are actually parts of feminists movements, or more closely associated with feminist movements. Actual MRA movements that identify as such are overwhelmingly anti-feminist, so even when they bring up a legitimate social problem it is for the wrong reasons. Example: male-on-male prison rape is a thing, and it's terrible, and we should be doing more about it. But MRA don't actually give a fuck about male-on-male prison rape, and only ever bring it up in response to feminists complaining about rape of women to suggest that because it also happens to men feminists should stop whining so much. It's not about protecting people of either gender from rape, it's about shutting down discussion so the status quo holds. They're pro-traditional gender values and, therefore, solidly against both men's and women's rights.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:45 am

TJS wrote:Also: Wouldn't the extra time women spend on personal grooming be a reflection that women have higher standards of appearance apply to them rather than the fact they do it because it's relaxing? I've seen what women have to do to even be considered "presentable", and it doesn't look like a lot of fun.

The problem is that there is no way of telling this from the data. The notes in the study went so far as to mention how they classified incidents like inviting your sister over to polish your nails. I have a difficult time thinking of that sort of thing as pertaining to a higher standard of appearance - to me, that's straight-up leisure. I mean, the real reason women spend more time in the bathroom on "personal care" might possibly be because they're playing Candy Crush Saga on their cell phones.

The fact that we don't actually know is a flaw in the data and the way it's categorized... But to all the men out there, may I make a recommendation for the future? If you want to be taken more seriously, next time you're visiting the restroom for an extended period of time, watch your TV show on your mobile device while you're at it.

DSM wrote:Actual MRA movements that identify as such are overwhelmingly anti-feminist, so even when they bring up a legitimate social problem it is for the wrong reasons.

Yeah. This is shit.

TheJerkStore · Post by **TheJerkStore** » Tue Nov 12, 2013 7:04 am

Maj wrote: The fact that we don't actually know is a flaw in the data and the way it's categorized... But to all the men out there, may I make a recommendation for the future? If you want to be taken more seriously, next time you're visiting the restroom for an extended period of time, watch your TV show on your mobile device while you're at it.

.

That's a pretty good idea assuming you live in a house with more than one toilet. Bathroom time is sacred and even disagreeable people will usually let you poop in peace.