Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lollygag

  1. Data from the government for assault reports on strangers vs known assailants. There's little difference at this point. https://nij.ojp.gov/media/image/16721
  2. I'm not sure what hill you all are trying to die on. The right sets up this false either/or choice and the left falls into every single time on all sorts of topics. The only choices here are not all unisex bathrooms everywhere or leave the strictly women's only/men's only bathrooms in place. The reasonable and realistic position is to add unisex restrooms but leave at least some women's rooms alone. Not sure how men feel about men's only rooms. But because the left has the compulsion of opposing magnetic polarities to instantly and often thoughtlessly take the exact opposite of the conservative position (the left's version of owning the libs), they back themselves into outlandish and unrealistic positions at which point conservatives point and laugh at how crazy the far left is. And it works. For religious reasons alone, the women's only rooms aren't going anywhere as sects of Islam, Judiasim and Christians are going to sue the hell out of that one. Maybe there's there's more open mindedness among the young and unassaulted, but do you think changing *all public bathrooms* to unisex is really going to fly beyond that? Really? Just add unisex bathrooms. There's practical reasons to do so (women's restroom lines and flexibility for families with young children) besides creating a space for the non-cisgendered for those who are still freaked out.
  3. Yeah, though whether he planned it in the first place or hopped on the bandwagon or looked the other way, I don't know or have an opinion. I think the wine was poisoned as most believe, but there was something else going on with the sword that played into it or in addition to it, I don't know. I've laid it out briefly here and there but can't find it right now because the search on this site is horrid. Here's where I explain that Tywin set up Tyrion to be killed so this is a pattern with Tywin. When Tywin is thinking about murdering his family, his eyes are described as gold-flecked which I believe to represent that Tywin is putting the power of Casterly Rock over loyalty to his family. I was going to do a deep dive post on the Purple Wedding with some stuff I found, but looks like I didn't get around to it and now the thread's locked. And more... On Joff, this passage is where I think things truly changed. Relevant to the thread of what the power dynamic between heir and regent can be, we see: Tywin has no intent to ever relinquish power to Joff. He's just a figurehead. Joff is getting older and for the first time, truly challenges Tywin. No matter what power Tywin has, Joff is still king and he'll ruin them as Aerys III recalling Aerys II with whom Tywin was once besties but eventually came to be enemies. Joff is both too stupid, too dangerous, and too willful to be allowed to rule in his own right. Tywin looks at Joff with gold eyes and then orders him to have poisoned wine which is a strong hint that Tywin knew about the poisoned wine if he didn't come up with it in the first place. Tywin says there is time yet relative to Joff, implying that time wasn't limited on getting Joff in line. The passage moves right into discussing the Red Wedding. Tywin shows he's conflicted about Joff to Tyrion which is highly unusual. Then he states that he wants to appease Oberyn and the Martells who had family murdered by the actions of Aerys II and would not like the idea of Aerys III. A lot of time is spent rehashing Aerys II and the Martells which is perhaps a suggestion that the Lannisters will do what the Targs would not: keep their own in line. I'm guessing that Tywin was conflicted here, but the political ramifications of Aerys II which they still had yet to pay and the potential of Aerys III were what made the decision. On the side, Tywin says Elia was killed likely because he neglected to tell Gregor to spare her. Then he says Catelyn was killed despite Walder's plans to keep her hostage, so again, things went awry. Tywin says that Robert needed to be seen a hero who wouldn't kill children. That Tywin repeated the mistake with Catelyn as he did Elia is rather suspicious. Perhaps more likely, Tywin knows Tyrion would disapprove of Tywin's orders to kill Elia and Catelyn. His last line shows this correct. Going back to the thread, we can perhaps see a lot of parallels here between Tywin and Joff and LF and Robert. Like Tywin, I highly doubt LF plans to allow Robert much true control over anything which is why Sansa is trying to prop up Robert to weaken LF. The forum openly speculates about LF plotting to have Robert killed even though there's strong reason to believe that Robert is his son. To keep power himself, Tywin is putting the kingdom in the hands of Tommen who is Tytos' clone and whom Tywin despised as he nearly caused the fall of the Lannisters to the Reynes.
  4. The point is that there are often no easy answers and it's fluid. We see how complicated it gets as Joff grows when in ACOK through Tyrion largely, people are forced to weight who to obey: Tywin/Tyrion as the rich man, Joff the king, or Cersei, the priest/regent. The people were put into a bad situation where they had to weigh who to obey when they gave conflicting orders against punishment each had the power to levy. ACOK Tyrion I "In the streets, they call it the Red Messenger," Varys said. "They say it comes as a herald before a king, to warn of fire and blood to follow." The eunuch rubbed his powdered hands together. "May I leave you with a bit of a riddle, Lord Tyrion?" He did not wait for an answer. "In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. 'Do it,' says the king, 'for I am your lawful ruler.' 'Do it,' says the priest, 'for I command you in the names of the gods.' 'Do it,' says the rich man, 'and all this gold shall be yours.' So tell me—who lives and who dies?" Bowing deeply, the eunuch hurried from the common room on soft slippered feet. ACOK Tyrion II "Oh, I think not," Varys said, swirling the wine in his cup. "Power is a curious thing, my lord. Perchance you have considered the riddle I posed you that day in the inn?" "It has crossed my mind a time or two," Tyrion admitted. "The king, the priest, the rich man—who lives and who dies? Who will the swordsman obey? It's a riddle without an answer, or rather, too many answers. All depends on the man with the sword." "And yet he is no one," Varys said. "He has neither crown nor gold nor favor of the gods, only a piece of pointed steel." "That piece of steel is the power of life and death." "Just so . . . yet if it is the swordsmen who rule us in truth, why do we pretend our kings hold the power? Why should a strong man with a sword ever obey a child king like Joffrey, or a wine-sodden oaf like his father?" "Because these child kings and drunken oafs can call other strong men, with other swords." "Then these other swordsmen have the true power. Or do they? Whence came their swords? Why do they obey?" Varys smiled. "Some say knowledge is power. Some tell us that all power comes from the gods. Others say it derives from law. Yet that day on the steps of Baelor's Sept, our godly High Septon and the lawful Queen Regent and your ever-so-knowledgeable servant were as powerless as any cobbler or cooper in the crowd. Who truly killed Eddard Stark, do you think? Joffrey, who gave the command? Ser Ilyn Payne, who swung the sword? Or . . . another?" Tyrion cocked his head sideways. "Did you mean to answer your damned riddle, or only to make my head ache worse?" Varys smiled. "Here, then. Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less." ... Varys covered his mouth with his hand. "You are very cruel to say so. One last matter. Lady Tanda gave a small supper last night. I have the menu and the guest list for your inspection. When the wine was poured, Lord Gyles rose to lift a cup to the king, and Ser Balon Swann was heard to remark, 'We'll need three cups for that.' Many laughed . . ." Sansa determines that Robert must have more sweetsleep at risk to Robert's health because no one will respect him if he makes an appearance slung over a mule while throwing a fit. Sansa comes from a culture where even golden boy Robb needed to earn respect before being obeyed more than the very minimal amount. Note that Robb wasn't declared KitN until he had demostrated he could consistently defeat the likes of Tywin, in other words, until he'd demonstrated he was strong enough to hold that title despite his full entitlement to it by birth. AGOT Bran VI And when Lord Umber, who was called the Greatjon by his men and stood as tall as Hodor and twice as wide, threatened to take his forces home if he was placed behind the Hornwoods or the Cerwyns in the order of march, Robb told him he was welcome to do so. "And when we are done with the Lannisters," he promised, scratching Grey Wind behind the ear, "we will march back north, root you out of your keep, and hang you for an oathbreaker." Cursing, the Greatjon flung a flagon of ale into the fire and bellowed that Robb was so green he must piss grass. When Hallis Mollen moved to restrain him, he knocked him to the floor, kicked over a table, and unsheathed the biggest, ugliest greatsword that Bran had ever seen. All along the benches, his sons and brothers and sworn swords leapt to their feet, grabbing for their steel. Yet Robb only said a quiet word, and in a snarl and the blink of an eye Lord Umber was on his back, his sword spinning on the floor three feet away and his hand dripping blood where Grey Wind had bitten off two fingers. "My lord father taught me that it was death to bare steel against your liege lord," Robb said, "but doubtless you only meant to cut my meat." Bran's bowels went to water as the Greatjon struggled to rise, sucking at the red stumps of fingers … but then, astonishingly, the huge man laughed. "Your meat," he roared, "is bloody tough." And somehow after that the Greatjon became Robb's right hand, his staunchest champion, loudly telling all and sundry that the boy lord was a Stark after all, and they'd damn well better bend their knees if they didn't fancy having them chewed off. It's no coincidence that Joff dies right after challenging Tywin out in the open. This was a point of major power shift where the king gained on the rich man too much to be tolerated in someone as uncontrollable as Joff.
  5. The eloping vs kidnap/rape reads like a red herring to distract from their being other options. This isn't the only place where the readers have led down one path to distract them. My top guess right now is that they ran away together to prevent a war when Aerys found out about Lyanna being the knight and fearing a war between the Targs and Starks which would blow up. Stuff happened while they were on the run. It all lies with Ned: if Lyanna had eloped effectively ruining his life, the life of his family and truly screwing Westeros leading to countless deaths and even more misery, Ned would have more mixed feelings about Lyanna than he does. If Rhaegar had kidnapped/raped her which led to her death, Ned wouldn't be meh towards him. So whatever it is, it's door #3, something consistent with Ned putting Lyanna on a pedestal and being ok with Rhaegar.
  6. I'm going to push back hard on the "nothing bad happened" thing. The whole point of Metoo was that women don't report assaults because they won't be believed, no consequences will result, reporting forces them to relive the trauma, etc. https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system
  7. The thing with crime is odds and probabilities. Yes, people can do all sorts of things. The trick is making it easier or harder. There are no guarantees. This is something we all know and live by instinctively. Anyone can break into your house at any time if they really want to. Your windows and doors won't stop anyone who's determined or clever. That you feel truly and absolutely safe in your own home is an illusion. If we take your point and put it into action, we should all keep our windows and doors wide open whenever weather allows, because people can get in whenever they want anyhow. But we don't do that. We lock the windows and doors which only offer minimal protection if we're honest because we know how human behavior works: crime is often about ease and opportunity. Statistics. Make things more difficult and increase the odds of getting caught, and those with a predator mentality will move on to easier prey. Let me underscore this: predators like *easy* prey.
  8. Here you go. In spoilers in case you're eating right now. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/01/its-time-talk-about-how-toilets-may-be-spreading-covid-19/
  9. In a political climate where death threats are the norm and Republicans claim they prostrate themselves to Trump for fear for their lives, Ted Cruz throws his own daughters right into the middle of that to save himself.
  10. Been wondering if Cassidy's impeachment vote isn't part political calculation that LA isn't as red as it appears. The current gov is Dem, but he's an Edwards, so not the same thing.
  11. A few things: Most assault is by someone known, but 1 in 6 women have experienced attempted or completed assault which means assault by strangers still happens *a lot*. I know. As the article I cited states, predatory behavior is heavily influenced by opportunity. Sexual predators, especially those who go after strangers, aren't to be mistaken with horny men. They have some sort of predator/prey mentality. Those who identify as women and make difficult life choices to become women are extremely unlikely to view women as prey and trans women experience violence themselves from men. Predatory rapists are also unlikely to choose to dress as women to enter a women's room because identifying as prey is offensive to them. Full stalls that go to the floor with proper locking doors helps, but in a deserted bathroom, one is still truly trapped. If a man walks into a women's room, he's immediately stared at and called out from across the room - actions that predators actively avoid. In a unisex restroom, a predator can get within a few feet of me in an empty restroom and at that point, it's too late. And that doesn't address PTSD and anxiety.
  12. Assault isn't sex, and to call it sex diminishes the trauma associated with it which is why it's never referred to as such and why so many are confused by the title. This isn't really an either/or. There's no controversy here except your implication that all bathrooms should be unisex because why not? By all means, have some unisex bathrooms. But do not force women into unisex restrooms with that being the only option.
  13. I'm adamantly against this. I can speak from personal experience that if something happens to you once, you never feel safe again and I do not want to be trapped into a corner in a public restroom in an extremely vulnerable position with strange men around me. 1 in 6 women have experienced some form of attempted or completed sexual assault. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sexual-assault-statistics_n_58e24c14e4b0c777f788d24f https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence
  14. They've been griping about liberal universities since I can remember but now it's escalating to education/college is a bad thing and it's maybe better to not go at all.
  15. They can't teach the actual Founding Fathers, the Constitution and Bill of Rights because that would undermine their Christian white nation narrative. The far right is now promoting education as bad and liberal brainwashing. It's building up to turning going to college into a political thing. What's really disturbing is that after an insurrection where folks screamed 1776, Haley really looks like she's giving them a shout out and low-key telling them to keep on. Only took her a few days to totally reverse herself...again.
  16. I asked you to reread it, not just quote it. You twisted my words into another meaning and you apparently at least twice were confused about the subject of my sentences. Yes, the Capitol riots were people acting like children rather than behaving like adults. Do I really have to explain this? And I explained my last sentence in detail. A whole lotta things go into the Trumpism crap and economic explanations are only one part of that. If that's anyone's sole focus, then you've got these people very wrong. Bold: wut? There was no binary in anything I said.
  17. Bold: reread my post. Clearly not what I said. I'm not arguing your base point. I'm saying you view things through a particular lens and you're projecting that motive onto others who do not.
  18. If you're saying people acting out like children do because they're unable to articulate what they're really thinking and feeling, then yeah, I can see that. I'd caution against reading any one thing into things like that though. They're a are a mix and it includes folks who aren't wired to handle change in a time of great change, cultural and religious conflicts, an underestimated one I think is men's roles in society being in flux isn't being taken well by some, and culturally, just hating government and wanting to see it overthrown is rooted deep in American culture. No one wanted anyone hurt, but even leftys in OH got a perverse thrill of seeing the Capitol overrun before it came to light how bad it was. In rural culture, governments eventually going bad/worlds ending/apocalypses of all sorts is practically the air we breathe.
  19. I guess I'm trying to say that Trump isn't an isolationist because of any sort of principle or desired outcome and it shouldn't be treated that way on his or his cohorts' part. He's just id run amok and isolationist (control-freak, afraid of differences, the new, raised by a psychopath father, etc) is how his id rolls. It's has one foot still in the evolutionary swamp and likes it that way-ism. He's tried to start a war with Iran twice now which goes against isolationist ideas because it was all about his lizard-brain survivalism. He gives up our sovereignty to the likes of Russia because of lizard-brain survivalism, something a true isolationist wouldn't do.
  20. I agree. Just feel the need to make the distinction between the thing that is Trump and the things people project onto him. I don't think Trump has any sort of policy regarding globalization and isolationism. He's just purely transactional which globalization doesn't play into and lives like an isolationist, control-freak dictator who only eats toddler food and tried to turn the country into his company in turn because that's all he knows or cares about.
  21. The common denominator that I keep seeing is that it's a grift and then the rationalizations for why some are entitled to it and certain others are not.
  22. Unless you see everyday Americans individually choosing to move against the megawealthy, I'm not sure about that. I don't see the masses leveling consequences against Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, Facebook, Twitter, the constant corporate consolidations that we can barely keep track of anymore, etc. We still give them our money directly or indirectly. We reward companies with investments when they turn out higher profits doing exactly what we claim to be against by shorting their workers, trashing the environment, etc. If anyone wants to see where we got, the blame lies in the mirror for everyone and what ends it is for a lot of individuals to decide to quit subsidizing this. Bold: Having grown up on the inside of Republicanism and Trumpism, they're deeply interconnected. The mega rich created their own army of enablers. They can now give themselves massive tax cuts and since they've told the everyday Republican to not listen to any other news, they don't even know about the rich folks' tax cuts. They can do whatever they want and the masses will believe only what they want them to believe. Saw a movie very recently called Bacurau relevant to this point. The way the movie plays out is important to its point, so I won't say much except in spoilers in spoilers. It's on the kanopy app which you can access through your library card.
  23. Impeachment works perfectly fine as does many other areas of our government. What hasn't worked is political parties which operate closer to that of a street gang where loyalty comes first and representation is for party and not the actual people of one's district or state. George Washington was right. https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/quotes/article/however-political-parties-may-now-and-then-answer-popular-ends-they-are-likely-in-the-course-of-time-and-things-to-become-potent-engines-by-which-cunning-ambitious-and-unprincipled-men-will-be-enabled-to-subvert-the-power-of-the-people-and-to-usurp-for-th/
  24. I doubt any Republicans will switch to Dem, but it might be worth exploring a bi-partisan majority with either refugee Republicans or independent pro-democracy conservatives. Think someone was saying that they do that in Alaska. It'd be weird to be sure. Kasie Hunt said today that she had a long discussion with Romney that she couldn't discuss, but it was about how exhausted some Republicans were dealing with Trumpists. That's been reported countless times since the 2016 primary, so in reporting that and the gravity that she gave it makes me wonder if the break has all but happened and it's just about what form that takes and how many split. Romney and Ron Johnson were reported to be in an ugly public fight.
  • Create New...