Post a controversial opinion

The Caganer is not the only defecating character in the Catalan Christmas tradition—another is the Tió de Nadal, which also makes extensive use of the image of faecal matter (it is a log, i.e. tió, with a face painted on it, which, having been "fed" for several weeks, is told to defecate on Christmas Eve and "magically" produces candy for children, a candy that has supposedly come from its bowels). Other mentions of faeces and defecation are common in Catalan folklore: indeed, a popular Catalan saying for use before a meal is menja bé, caga fort i no tinguis por a la mort! ("Eat well, shit a good deal and don't be afraid of death!").

Learn something new every day.

the essential catalan nativity scene includes someone pooping

just think of that every time you see all the unrelated-to-jesus stuff in north america, that the most christian-related decoration commonly used in many parts of the world, the nativity scene, is not complete without someone defecating

it's a holiday for everyone

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/ed/7a/1c/ed7a1c2068b9124817268affd0560523.jpg

Now, my life isn't complete without a Vladimir Putin caganer.

that's not even a good caricature

god, the bono one.

http://www.newstalk.com/content/000/images/000127/130777_54_news_hub_121675_656x500.png

He seems to have smeared the shit around his eyes.

Sorry, but I'm still not getting the point on the Christmas thing.

Most people are celebrating family, friends, gifts, food, drink, winter, decorations, television, films. The name is the only really Christian thing left.
At this point nativity plays seems like Dickens' A Chistmas Carol, Grinch and The Great Escape. I guess it depends on where you live.

On a thread where people have advocated for a two-child policy and death panels and have stated that it is useless for childless people to live past 40, "it's weird/funny that non-Christians celebrate Christmas" has turned out to be the most actually controversial opinion on this thread. Interesting.

well there you have it, more non-christians here like holidays than there are posters who are willing defend having more than two kids or be strongly anti-estate planning or w/e

I think this says more about the number of non-christian ilxors under the age of 40 with two or fewer children who have aging parents than anything

poptimism is garbage. down with rockism. anarchy everywhere. the dawn of the self-governed individual cometh.

We should all be choosing our own winners by now. The dawn of the Internet promised listeners a sandbox with no horizons, a borderless playground where niche tastes would be cultivated by robust debate. Instead, today’s pop conversation seems driven by the latent desire for a cozy poptimistic consensus — an obsequious hive-mind tediously churning toward oblivion.

And while poptimism feels so ripe for toppling, it triumphs in a cultural space that continues to feel vast, crowded and exhausting. We need things to hold on to. We’d like to believe that Justin Bieber’s fame isn’t just a cosmic prank. We’d like to tell ourselves that Katy Perry’s infantilizing Super Bowl splurge was somehow heroic. We want to feel as though our irrational universe obeys a hidden logic and that we each belong to something greater than ourselves.

This is where poptimism does us dirty. It rightfully recognizes the complexity of pop music, but it too often fails to generate a justly complex conversation. And when everyone agrees that a shiny new piece of art is unimpeachable, how can we feel as though we’re not missing out on the truth?

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/at-the-top-of-the-pop-music-heap-theres-no-criticizing-the-view/2015/04/16/d98d53a8-e1f2-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html

its a sloppy joe without the tomaters

― Hammer Smashed Bagels, Saturday, December 12, 2015 11:42 AM (4 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'll be damned. I never knew this wasn't just something that Roseanne made up.

I refer you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maid-Rite

if that was on the Roseanne tv show it probably made it in via Tom Arnold, resident of the loose meat sandwich part of the country

Ahhhh this is amazing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maid-Rite#/media/File:Maid-Rite,_Macomb.JPG

I've never been to any of those states so I didn't know about this Maid-rite joint.

Roseanne and Jackie owned a loose meat joint!

lol from the wiki link:

In later seasons of the American sitcom Roseanne, Roseanne Conner (Roseanne Barr) co-owns a restaurant called the "Lanford Lunch Box" in the fictional town of Lanford, Illinois, which specializes in loose meat sandwiches.[6] The inspiration for Lunch Box was a real-life restaurant called Canteen Lunch in the Alley in Ottumwa, Iowa.[7] In 1993, Roseanne and then-husband Tom Arnold opened Roseanne and Tom's Big Food Diner (based on the fictional Lanford Lunchbox) in Eldon, Iowa (less than 20 miles southeast of Ottumwa's Canteen Lunch), also specializing in loose meat sandwiches.

We’d like to tell ourselves that Katy Perry’s infantilizing Super Bowl splurge was somehow heroic.

Left Shark 4 evs

a sandbox with no horizons!

just to clarify, it's "i don't EVEN watch tv". the even is very important

― Karl Malone, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:11 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

which is really only a suitable phrasing if you are famous movie actor being asked to take a TV role

― Sufjan Grafton, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:15 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it's "i don't even WATCH tv" imo

― μpright mammal (mh), Monday, December 14, 2015 8:17 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

"smell tv? i don't even WATCH tv"

― Sufjan Grafton, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:18 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the accent is definitely on WATCH, sorry. I was just capitalizing EVEN to make it easier to notice the additional word. just trying to help over here

― Karl Malone, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:19 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

although I DON'T EVEN WATCH TV is also acceptable in some rare situations

― Karl Malone, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:20 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

for example, when you're implicated in a crime that somehow depends on the fact that you watch tv

― Karl Malone, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:20 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

"I don't whip. I don't nae nae. I don't EVEN watch tv."

― Sufjan Grafton, Monday, December 14, 2015 8:21 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

guys

we had a whole thread about this

"I don't even own a TV"

yeah, but that thread is all the way over there, it's too hard!

alcholics are not bad people (unless they are psychopaths or suffer from affluenza)

is that controversial? i thought that was conventional wisdom in 2015

the disease theory of alcoholism

quite a few have the disease in my family, you could accuse some of them of being selfish people or wayward parents, but not bad people. The worst person I know irl is a psychopath who pretended to be a recovering alcoholic, just so he could garner sympathy and pull in a vulnerable woman to his ghastly sphere of control and domestic violence. Now he is out of prison again, he is up to his usual MO.

I personally don't like the "disease" theory of addiction. from what ive read, and seen, addictions are patterns of behavior that some people are congenitally predisposed to, or develop as a reaction to childhood neglect, or trauma (in childhood or later), or some combination of predisposition and neglect/trauma.

i don't take issue with the aspect of the disease theory that seeks to minimize the role of personal choice or agency in addiction.

but "disease" doesn't seem right to me. on a societal level I really think we should mainly look at addiction as a developmental disorder arising from unsatisfactory care in childhood.

that's very Freudian

also not v accurate ime

I don't think it's Freudian, im not looking at it from a psychoanalysis/subconscious sort of lens.

Assuming the root of a problem is based in unsatisfactory childhood care isn't Freudian?

Assisted suicide should be a human right after 30.

xp. I believe that childhood trauma and neglect has an influence on the actual physical development of the brain. I don't think that you have to ascribe to Freudian ideas, or even consider them at all, to think that this might affect later-life behavior.

ah that makes sense

psychopaths have path right in the name

Assisted suicide should be a human right after 30.

― black metal is emo for vikings (monster mash), Friday, December 18, 2015 11:35 PM (Yesterday)

Not good enough. Over the age of 18, you should be able to request this, and it should be seen as a normal process in society.

What I don't understand is why the fuck most humans want to force people to keep living even when they clearly don't want to.

If it was really easy to access assisted suicide I think a number of people I'm close to, who don't currently want to die, would be dead. So I'm a little ambivalent about offering it so readily for people who are able-bodied.

I agree that it's someone's right to put an end to their life whenever they wish.

I had been scared to post my most actually controversial opinion: I'm still working out what I think of this but it seems deeply problematic and discriminatory to permit assisted suicide only in cases of a "grievous and irremediable medical condition". I feel like it should either be legal for all mentally competent adults or illegal for all mentally competent adults.

Agreed, and it should be the former imo

Xp. Might be a Charter challenge in that. Section 15(1). Not sure if Bev Mc CJC and the gang would be into it.

alcoholism isnt a disease

tell that to your liver

My partner almost tells me she wants to die every day, usually at some point when she is having a shit time. She doesn't really want to die, she just gets depressed about living in a broken body (she has a pretty nasty rare form of MS). Talk of making assisted suicide easier is not a good thing imo. In the long term term it can only lead to easing the path to another T4 program "those not deemed worthy of life".

All of the least painful and most successful methods of suicide are put far, far out of normal people's reach. Widespread assisted suicide would not only help those who seek to end their lives, but mean that the results would be less traumatic for everyone involved - there would be fewer public suicides, loved ones would not have to cope with corpse discovery, you would know that the person involved got to go peacefully, etc etc.

we should mainly look at addiction as a developmental disorder arising from unsatisfactory care in childhood.

hmmm. Adult native americans who encountered alcohol for the first time during initial contact with settlers of European origin very often displayed all the behaviors of acute alcohol addiction very quickly. Does this mean you think they were raised 'unsatisfactorily', and the alcohol-addictive behavior only erupted when the substance became available? Seems like a weird theory to account for that well-attested historic phenomenon.

i think we could do better as a society if it was accepted that everyone would be euthanized by default at 50, maybe 60

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/d0/87/d087984306c3cf4b15300cff4cb89a03.jpg?itok=GsvEcMyH