Having said that my internal skeptic is kicking in making me suspicious of the note.
Whoever wrote that note has the your / you're rule *exactly* wrong. They use 'your' when they should use 'you're' and vice versa. Given that rule is the one that really sets grammarian's teeth on edge, the note seems perfectly designed to upset people. Perhaps a bit too perfect?
Not saying I can divine anything but it just seems a bit too easy of a target . . .
Not to mention this is the kind of claim that is impossible to verify, thus my inner sceptic is going 4-alarm. My mom, dad and sister are all Evangelical Trump supporters and they would never treat somebody this way. My dad is such a good tipper that it pisses my mom off! I call bs on who really wrote this note (assuming it's even authentic). No real Christian would do this...
Edit: Incidentally, my sister is a full-time psyche-ward nurse and my mom was a teacher for 30 years (now retired).
Idk....having worked in a restaurant for about a year half a decade ago, I came to a conclusion that some people actually ENJOY making as much trouble for their server as possible. The kind of people who order the same thing every time yet consistently ask to have their meal refunded as if they have no idea what it was going to come out of the kitchen tasting like. Most people are fine, some treat you really good. There are also restaurant customers who are the the devil incarnate, whose night isn't complete without some sadistic treatment of their server.
Having said that my internal skeptic is kicking in making me suspicious of the note.
Whoever wrote that note has the your / you're rule *exactly* wrong. They use 'your' when they should use 'you're' and vice versa. Given that rule is the one that really sets grammarian's teeth on edge, the note seems perfectly designed to upset people. Perhaps a bit too perfect?
Not saying I can divine anything but it just seems a bit too easy of a target . . .
Not to mention this is the kind of claim that is impossible to verify, thus my inner sceptic is going 4-alarm. My mom, dad and sister are all Evangelical Trump supporters and they would never treat somebody this way. My dad is such a good tipper that it pisses my mom off! I call bs on who really wrote this note (assuming it's even authentic). No real Christian would do this...
Edit: Incidentally, my sister is a full-time psyche-ward nurse and my mom was a teacher for 30 years (now retired).
Idk....having worked in a restaurant for about a year half a decade ago, I came to a conclusion that some people actually ENJOY making as much trouble for their server as possible. The kind of people who order the same thing every time yet consistently ask to have their meal refunded as if they have no idea what it was going to come out of the kitchen tasting like. Most people are fine, some treat you really good. There are also restaurant customers who are the the devil incarnate, whose night isn't complete without some sadistic treatment of their server.
Not likely that they're real Christians though. I can't imagine Jesus doing something like that. More likely they're cheap bastards using Christianity as their excuse...
@Balrog99: I've seen a couple articles on Buzzfeed re-posting social medias posts where waiters were posting photos of the absurd things that people gave them instead of a tip. Sometimes people would leave religious pamphlets or notes telling them to find Christ or whatever, but no tip. Presumably the idea is that you're giving somebody something more important than money.
Except, of course, Christ was VERY big on charity, and stiffing your waiter is a profoundly selfish and un-Christian thing to do. A proper missionary would speak to the waiter in person about God, and leave a generous tip.
So yeah, that happens sometimes. It's a thing. The most egregious examples, though, weren't religious--they were people leaving "You need to lose weight" notes in lieu of tip.
They actually have religious tracts that you can stuff under something, like a salt shaker/water glass and *Look* like money, but are actually religious tracts.
They actually have religious tracts that you can stuff under something, like a salt shaker/water glass and *Look* like money, but are actually religious tracts.
As the grandson of Christian missionaries, I find it not so much offensive as downright confusing that people would pay real money to purchase fake dollars designed to make random strangers associate the feeling of monetary disappointment with religion.
"Manhood 1.0 is absolute crap and only ends up with emotionally retarded males who cannot handle emotions or more complex relationships. I've been struggling with anger outbursts all my life becuase I was never taught to deal with it in a mature way. Happyness, hornyness and rage were pretty much the three only feelings a man should feel. All the intricate feelings ranging from sadness, to emptyness, to lonelyness etc are replaced by rage, anger and hate."
You do know exactly the same can be said about women?
Some women are more aggressive in social situations (ask any law enforcement when the pubs turn out), some women handle emotions incredibly badly, some women are not taught to handle emotions in a mature way, some women bitch, ostracize, bully and scheme far more than men and never let things drop. About the only difference is that some women are never happy because there's always something wrong with the world rather than with themselves.
How about instead of pointing fingers and saying this sex or that sex has all the bad, people start to admit there are a lot of people who everybody would be better off crossing the road to avoid until they learn how to behave.
You make two mistakes here: 1: You try to compare individuals' behavior with systemic behavior. 2: You immediately feel compelled to point your finger "But what about THOSE ppl who ALSO do wrong!!!11"
The first one is a classic mistake many ppl do who haven't really read up on facts and is used all too often as counter-arguments. I spoke of manhood, how men systematically are brought up to embody a set of ideals that are supposedly "Manly". This doesn't mean some men are very different from those ideals, it's the difference between a society structures and individuals. I won't bother linking you to facts about this though since you discarded my last link as pointless and didn't bother looking at it seems, but there are tons of academics who can witness to this. You know, ppl who have actually studied this for years and are promenent in their field of work and don't base their arguments on what they've read in forums or on emotions.
Secondly, I never said anything about women, my whole post was about men and social structures making men emotionally inadept to handle more complex feelings. So maybe ask yourself why you felt the need to jump up on your horse, pick up your lance and start attacking the windmills, ay?
I've just reread the post. The beginning of your post was all about you. About your breakup, your innability to cope with emotions because you haven't been taught how to, your desire for "sex with an emotional attachment" (as if that's something only you want that nobody understands) your attractiveness, ect.
So if we are not talking about individuals' behavior, what was the point of all that? You've tried to use anecdote as evidence of some systematic failure.
You then project what you believe as your failings or disappointments onto society.
And then to cap it off, you suggest my response was the emotional one.
And yet here again in this post, you have veered into personal insult. Because insulting an anonomous stranger on the internet is such a good illustration of detachment.
How about instead of pointing fingers and saying this sex or that sex has all the bad, people start to admit there are a lot of people who everybody would be better off crossing the road to avoid until they learn how to behave.
That's what I'm saying, yes. I don't know why anyone would think I wasn't--I certainly never said otherwise.
Not sure why you have directed this post at me as I didn't answer any post of yours or suggest that you didn't believe this. (confused)
Having said that my internal skeptic is kicking in making me suspicious of the note.
Whoever wrote that note has the your / you're rule *exactly* wrong. They use 'your' when they should use 'you're' and vice versa. Given that rule is the one that really sets grammarian's teeth on edge, the note seems perfectly designed to upset people. Perhaps a bit too perfect?
Not saying I can divine anything but it just seems a bit too easy of a target . . .
Not to mention this is the kind of claim that is impossible to verify, thus my inner sceptic is going 4-alarm. My mom, dad and sister are all Evangelical Trump supporters and they would never treat somebody this way. My dad is such a good tipper that it pisses my mom off! I call bs on who really wrote this note (assuming it's even authentic). No real Christian would do this...
A pastor in St. Louis did a similar thing a few years ago, writing "I give God 10%, why do you get 18%?" and zeroing out the tip line. The pastor was apparently tracked down and interviewed.
Uhhh... isn't this admission that leaving that note in an act of the devil? Also, why 5 dollars? If it fake anyways, leave a 20 dollar bill. They be like "A fake 20 dollar is more than the waiter deserves, five at most!"
They actually have religious tracts that you can stuff under something, like a salt shaker/water glass and *Look* like money, but are actually religious tracts.
Hmm. You know, the NPC meme now sounds a lot more meaningful to me than I initially thought, that it was just a new anti-SJW jab. Because it goes beyond political subtext and actually reflects the fundamental flaw in one's psychic, that makes a Christian to leave fake bills like that, or transforms a liberal into SJW, or makes people call others pedophiles for playing anime games.
How about instead of pointing fingers and saying this sex or that sex has all the bad, people start to admit there are a lot of people who everybody would be better off crossing the road to avoid until they learn how to behave.
That's what I'm saying, yes. I don't know why anyone would think I wasn't--I certainly never said otherwise.
Not sure why you have directed this post at me as I didn't answer any post of yours or suggest that you didn't believe this. (confused)
Ah, I see--you were asking @Skatan these questions, not me.
Apparently, you are supposed to leave these along with real money, but some people are just so cheap that they leave this instead of money.
From Ebay: 25 - One Hundred Dollar Bill Money Tracts Gospel Tracts Bible Tracts Evangelism
Selling price? $1.00
Yeah, its intended that you leave real money alongside them. That being said, I don't think it makes them much better. As a Christian you should NEVER use deception to tell someone about Christ. A better method would be to leave a not inviting them to church or something alongside a real tip.
I certainly can't imagine anyone, in any field of work, in any country I ever visited, being even remotely interested (or thankful, for that matter) for getting preached at by customers. Especially, you know, while w.o.r.k.i.n.g. Tipping isn't common in Germany, per se. But nevertheless appreciated when done. So we luckily are spared of such religious (and rather pointless, I might add) fake money tip scams.
1 or 2 times a year, someone comes to my apartment door asking if I'd like to hear more about the gospel of Jesus Christ (or something similar). Honestly, in the moment I feel incredibly awkward and bad for these people, because I imagine they get a 95% rejection rate. I tell them I'm busy (which is a lie, because if I'm in my apartment I am almost certainly not busy) and get them on their way as soon as possible. I imagine mine is the most mild reaction they receive.
I honestly can't decide which would be shittier; getting hit on/asked out by a customer, or having them try to convert me. Wtf is wrong with some people? Your server is required to be nice, it doesn't mean they like you.
Also, I really don't think you can claim even far left people (let alone moderate lefties) are as problematic as right wingers, because equality is a core left tenet, meaning their positions is literally better for the world, unless you're a bigot. Don't false-equivalence me, claiming that the far right and far left are similarly bad when one group contains LITERAL NAZIS.
For what it's worth, the American left doesn't contain Stalinists. That's not really a thing in this country. We have no Stalinists or any other kind of communist running for office. I've never heard of any liberal politicians who have ties to the Communist Party.
For what it's worth, the American left doesn't contain Stalinists. That's not really a thing in this country. We have no Stalinists or any other kind of communist running for office. I've never heard of any liberal politicians who have ties to the Communist Party.
As I've said before, this country has ZERO chance of ever falling into communism. It stands a fair chance (possibly very soon) of going the fascist route. If people don't believe it, look into the history and beliefs of "American heroes" Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford. This country can't even wrap it's head around the idea that everyone deserves basic healthcare, much less frickin' communism.
For what it's worth, the American left doesn't contain Stalinists. That's not really a thing in this country. We have no Stalinists or any other kind of communist running for office. I've never heard of any liberal politicians who have ties to the Communist Party.
As I've said before, this country has ZERO chance of ever falling into communism. It stands a fair chance (possibly very soon) of going the fascist route. If people don't believe it, look into the history and beliefs of "American heroes" Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford. This country can't even wrap it's head around the idea that everyone deserves basic healthcare, much less frickin' communism.
The American right doesn't contain fascists. It's completely silly to bash the idea of the communist left and then peddle the idea of the fascist right.
For what it's worth, the American left doesn't contain Stalinists. That's not really a thing in this country. We have no Stalinists or any other kind of communist running for office. I've never heard of any liberal politicians who have ties to the Communist Party.
As I've said before, this country has ZERO chance of ever falling into communism. It stands a fair chance (possibly very soon) of going the fascist route. If people don't believe it, look into the history and beliefs of "American heroes" Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford. This country can't even wrap it's head around the idea that everyone deserves basic healthcare, much less frickin' communism.
The American right doesn't contain fascists. It's completely silly to bash the idea of the communist left and then peddle the idea of the fascist right.
I didn't do that. I'm saying that there is no significant leftist bent in this country whatsoever, certainly not with any power whatsoever. Compared to almost any country in Europe or Canada, even mainstream Democratic positions are well on the right side of the pendulum. The already meager, bare bones social safety is under attack on a near constant basis. We can't even guarantee healthcare to our citizens. Up until the last 10 years (and certainly the last 50), this country has been stuck in the dark ages in regards to sexuality and what constitutes "moral" behavior. Religion (almost exclusively Christianity) still has an absolute stranglehold on public discourse. I don't support the Democratic or "left-wing" party in this country because it is where I want it to be. I support it because it isn't stuck in cement in the stone-age. Case in point:
What I believe is happening on the American right and what I actually type out in posts on this forum are two entirely different things. If I typed out everything I thought in my head I wouldn't be allowed to post here anymore. I edit myself accordingly because it is required by the rules. I'm better at it now than I was 18 months ago.
Here's a question, and I've told this story once before. When the situation at Standing Rock was taking place here in North Dakota last year (or maybe even before that, I forget at this point), I was in the grocery store and I was shopping the freezer section and was standing within ear and eye shot of two guys near the dairy. I heard them talking about the Native Americans, and then heard "yeah, they need to send them back to their tee-pees". Now, I am not a violent person. I have never been in a fight in my life. But I AM 6"2, and taller than about 95% of the people I meet, so no one ever sees fit to mess with me by default. And what I did do in this situation was shoot them a glare specifically meant to shame them into ending their conversation in front of me. I didn't say a word, but I made it perfectly clear what I thought of them. And it worked. Because they shut up and walked away. Because they KNEW what they were saying was wrong. Was this an example of SJW behavior?? Was I out of line for LOOKING at them in a disapproving fashion?? Was I trampling on their free speech rights?? Does the measure of whether you believe in freedom of expression force you to just cover your ears and go "la la la" when you hear racist garbage being spewed in public?? Honest question.
For what it's worth, the American left doesn't contain Stalinists. That's not really a thing in this country. We have no Stalinists or any other kind of communist running for office. I've never heard of any liberal politicians who have ties to the Communist Party.
As I've said before, this country has ZERO chance of ever falling into communism. It stands a fair chance (possibly very soon) of going the fascist route. If people don't believe it, look into the history and beliefs of "American heroes" Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford. This country can't even wrap it's head around the idea that everyone deserves basic healthcare, much less frickin' communism.
The American right doesn't contain fascists. It's completely silly to bash the idea of the communist left and then peddle the idea of the fascist right.
I didn't do that. I'm saying that there is no significant leftist bent in this country whatsoever, certainly not with any power whatsoever. Compared to almost any country in Europe or Canada, even mainstream Democratic positions are well on the right side of the pendulum. The already meager, bare bones social safety is under attack on a near constant basis. We can't even guarantee healthcare to our citizens. Up until the last 10 years (and certainly the last 50), this country has been stuck in the dark ages in regards to sexuality and what constitutes "moral" behavior. Religion (almost exclusively Christianity) still has an absolute stranglehold on public discourse. I don't support the Democratic or "left-wing" party in this country because it is where I want it to be. I support it because it isn't stuck in cement in the stone-age. Case in point:
What I believe is happening on the American right and what I actually type out in posts on this forum are two entirely different things. If I typed out everything I thought in my head I wouldn't be allowed to post here anymore. I edit myself accordingly because it is required by the rules. I'm better at it now than I was 18 months ago.
Here's a question, and I've told this story once before. When the situation at Standing Rock was taking place here in North Dakota last year (or maybe even before that, I forget at this point), I was in the grocery store and I was shopping the freezer section and was standing within ear and eye shot of two guys near the dairy. I heard them talking about the Native Americans, and then heard "yeah, they need to send them back to their tee-pees". Now, I am not a violent person. I have never been in a fight in my life. But I AM 6"2, and taller than about 95% of the people I meet, so no one ever sees fit to mess with me by default. And what I did do in this situation was shoot them a glare specifically meant to shame them into ending their conversation in front of me. I didn't say a word, but I made it perfectly clear what I thought of them. And it worked. Because they shut up and walked away. Because they KNEW what they were saying was wrong. Was this an example of SJW behavior?? Was I out of line for LOOKING at them in a disapproving fashion?? Was I trampling on their free speech rights?? Does the measure of whether you believe in freedom of expression force you to just cover your ears and go "la la la" when you hear racist garbage being spewed in public?? Honest question.
I think that was more an example of you using "might is right" TBH.
And yes you were trampling their free speech rights. That's the point of free speech, you don't get to decide what other people say.
You can be offended, you can say you are offended, and then you can walk away. But using your size? No way, that's the law of the jungle.
I disagree with the notion that tall people are not allowed to give someone a disapproving look. I don't think giving someone a glare amounts to suppression of freedom of speech.
Putting aside the fact that there were two of them and one of him--which means that they'd have had the advantage in a fight--they knew that @jjstraka34 couldn't have laid a hand on them without getting thrown in the slammer. Starting a fight is illegal.
If @jjstraka34 was a 5-foot old lady, the glare would have been just as effective, if not more so. Those men clammed up out of shame, not fear.
I've just reread the post. The beginning of your post was all about you. About your breakup, your innability to cope with emotions because you haven't been taught how to, your desire for "sex with an emotional attachment" (as if that's something only you want that nobody understands) your attractiveness, ect.
So if we are not talking about individuals' behavior, what was the point of all that? You've tried to use anecdote as evidence of some systematic failure.
You then project what you believe as your failings or disappointments onto society.
And then to cap it off, you suggest my response was the emotional one.
And yet here again in this post, you have veered into personal insult. Because insulting an anonomous stranger on the internet is such a good illustration of detachment.
My first post was just some random ramblings I felt was on-topic, though of course based on my own experiences as man. I added some fluff around it to portrait a bigger picture. There was no hidden agenda other than to draw upon my own experience as a white binary male in a patriarchal society to talk about my views on manhood and the emotional deficiencies many males are brought up with.
You took a part of that first post and replied to it, though twisting it in a new and undesired direction, and then I replied to that specific reply telling you why I think you are wrong. So don't drag the first post into my second one as if it was some kind of thread of thought from my side.
So here's the thing, you addressed certain parts of my post, I responded. Either you continue to address that specific question (or not, the choice is yours) but let's please leave the meta-discussions since they add no value.
As we're all well aware, there was a pretty big gathering of far right protesters that were literally spouting Nazi propaganda. There weren't Stalinists on the other side, at the very least nobody on the left was spouting old USSR communist slogans ffs.
The USA has a significant portion of the population that is quite authoritarian, and they are usually right wing and racists, and these racists are willing to have slightly less rights if it means minorities have it worse. These are the people that quite literally believe police are always in the right, and do not see the constant barrage of police abuse of minorities as worthy of censure. There are some unsavoury people in the far left, but they are at their core working for equal opportunity and rights. That's why its a false equivalency, bad on the left usually means using bad means for good ends.
That's the point of free speech, you don't get to decide what other people say.
Wrong.
The point of free speech is that the government won’t prosecute you for saying it.
No one is being hauled off to a re-education centre after saying an intolerable thing.
You can persuade people from not saying any way you please, unless it breaks a law, such as going over there and punching the guy in the face. That’s the law of the jungle.
Comments
Idk....having worked in a restaurant for about a year half a decade ago, I came to a conclusion that some people actually ENJOY making as much trouble for their server as possible. The kind of people who order the same thing every time yet consistently ask to have their meal refunded as if they have no idea what it was going to come out of the kitchen tasting like. Most people are fine, some treat you really good. There are also restaurant customers who are the the devil incarnate, whose night isn't complete without some sadistic treatment of their server.
Except, of course, Christ was VERY big on charity, and stiffing your waiter is a profoundly selfish and un-Christian thing to do. A proper missionary would speak to the waiter in person about God, and leave a generous tip.
So yeah, that happens sometimes. It's a thing. The most egregious examples, though, weren't religious--they were people leaving "You need to lose weight" notes in lieu of tip.
http://www.makeitclearnow.org/dollartract.html
https://randalrauser.com/2013/09/evangelistic-tracts-so-bad-that-theyre-good/
https://scottlinkblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/06/eternal-disappointment-money-tracts/
The beginning of your post was all about you. About your breakup, your innability to cope with emotions because you haven't been taught how to, your desire for "sex with an emotional attachment" (as if that's something only you want that nobody understands) your attractiveness, ect.
So if we are not talking about individuals' behavior, what was the point of all that?
You've tried to use anecdote as evidence of some systematic failure.
You then project what you believe as your failings or disappointments onto society.
And then to cap it off, you suggest my response was the emotional one.
And yet here again in this post, you have veered into personal insult.
Because insulting an anonomous stranger on the internet is such a good illustration of detachment.
https://consumerist.com/2013/01/31/waitress-who-posted-no-tip-receipt-from-pastor-customer-fired-from-job
So, yeah, real Christians do this.
On a related note:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study
From Ebay: 25 - One Hundred Dollar Bill Money Tracts Gospel Tracts Bible Tracts Evangelism
Selling price? $1.00
Also, I really don't think you can claim even far left people (let alone moderate lefties) are as problematic as right wingers, because equality is a core left tenet, meaning their positions is literally better for the world, unless you're a bigot. Don't false-equivalence me, claiming that the far right and far left are similarly bad when one group contains LITERAL NAZIS.
I didn't do that. I'm saying that there is no significant leftist bent in this country whatsoever, certainly not with any power whatsoever. Compared to almost any country in Europe or Canada, even mainstream Democratic positions are well on the right side of the pendulum. The already meager, bare bones social safety is under attack on a near constant basis. We can't even guarantee healthcare to our citizens. Up until the last 10 years (and certainly the last 50), this country has been stuck in the dark ages in regards to sexuality and what constitutes "moral" behavior. Religion (almost exclusively Christianity) still has an absolute stranglehold on public discourse. I don't support the Democratic or "left-wing" party in this country because it is where I want it to be. I support it because it isn't stuck in cement in the stone-age. Case in point:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/21/us/politics/transgender-trump-administration-sex-definition.html
What I believe is happening on the American right and what I actually type out in posts on this forum are two entirely different things. If I typed out everything I thought in my head I wouldn't be allowed to post here anymore. I edit myself accordingly because it is required by the rules. I'm better at it now than I was 18 months ago.
Here's a question, and I've told this story once before. When the situation at Standing Rock was taking place here in North Dakota last year (or maybe even before that, I forget at this point), I was in the grocery store and I was shopping the freezer section and was standing within ear and eye shot of two guys near the dairy. I heard them talking about the Native Americans, and then heard "yeah, they need to send them back to their tee-pees". Now, I am not a violent person. I have never been in a fight in my life. But I AM 6"2, and taller than about 95% of the people I meet, so no one ever sees fit to mess with me by default. And what I did do in this situation was shoot them a glare specifically meant to shame them into ending their conversation in front of me. I didn't say a word, but I made it perfectly clear what I thought of them. And it worked. Because they shut up and walked away. Because they KNEW what they were saying was wrong. Was this an example of SJW behavior?? Was I out of line for LOOKING at them in a disapproving fashion?? Was I trampling on their free speech rights?? Does the measure of whether you believe in freedom of expression force you to just cover your ears and go "la la la" when you hear racist garbage being spewed in public?? Honest question.
I think that was more an example of you using "might is right" TBH.
And yes you were trampling their free speech rights.
That's the point of free speech, you don't get to decide what other people say.
You can be offended, you can say you are offended, and then you can walk away.
But using your size?
No way, that's the law of the jungle.
Putting aside the fact that there were two of them and one of him--which means that they'd have had the advantage in a fight--they knew that @jjstraka34 couldn't have laid a hand on them without getting thrown in the slammer. Starting a fight is illegal.
If @jjstraka34 was a 5-foot old lady, the glare would have been just as effective, if not more so. Those men clammed up out of shame, not fear.
You took a part of that first post and replied to it, though twisting it in a new and undesired direction, and then I replied to that specific reply telling you why I think you are wrong. So don't drag the first post into my second one as if it was some kind of thread of thought from my side.
So here's the thing, you addressed certain parts of my post, I responded. Either you continue to address that specific question (or not, the choice is yours) but let's please leave the meta-discussions since they add no value.
Cheerio.
The USA has a significant portion of the population that is quite authoritarian, and they are usually right wing and racists, and these racists are willing to have slightly less rights if it means minorities have it worse. These are the people that quite literally believe police are always in the right, and do not see the constant barrage of police abuse of minorities as worthy of censure. There are some unsavoury people in the far left, but they are at their core working for equal opportunity and rights. That's why its a false equivalency, bad on the left usually means using bad means for good ends.
The point of free speech is that the government won’t prosecute you for saying it.
No one is being hauled off to a re-education centre after saying an intolerable thing.
You can persuade people from not saying any way you please, unless it breaks a law, such as going over there and punching the guy in the face. That’s the law of the jungle.
Gotta love science.