Upload
Login or register

jonluw

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:7/28/2011
Last Login:12/03/2016
Stats
Comment Ranking:#19143
Highest Content Rank:#1127
Highest Comment Rank:#3555
Content Thumbs: 6773 total,  7767 ,  994
Comment Thumbs: 3030 total,  3809 ,  779
Content Level Progress: 70% (70/100)
Level 167 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 168 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Comment Level Progress: 19% (19/100)
Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:3
Content Views:164148
Times Content Favorited:755 times
Total Comments Made:1001
FJ Points:10091
Favorite Tags: tags (2) | who (2)
So I didn't really want to make an account, but I couldn't resist posting this shit I saw on the tv...

  • Views: 97389
    Thumbs Up 5104 Thumbs Down 125 Total: +4979
    Comments: 488
    Favorites: 692
    Uploaded: 01/15/12
    The life of a married man The life of a married man
  • Views: 48548
    Thumbs Up 1983 Thumbs Down 754 Total: +1229
    Comments: 353
    Favorites: 49
    Uploaded: 04/18/12
    Rarity Rarity
  • Views: 13349
    Thumbs Up 597 Thumbs Down 54 Total: +543
    Comments: 24
    Favorites: 11
    Uploaded: 05/08/12
    Girls will never know how this feels Girls will never know how this...
  • Views: 1295
    Thumbs Up 22 Thumbs Down 9 Total: +13
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 2
    Uploaded: 08/17/12
    It bloody hurts It bloody hurts
  • Views: 2263
    Thumbs Up 12 Thumbs Down 5 Total: +7
    Comments: 2
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/01/11
    A poem A poem
  • Views: 796
    Thumbs Up 14 Thumbs Down 12 Total: +2
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/06/11
    Berries Berries
First2[ 10 ]
First2[ 10 ]

latest user's comments

#37 - Is this really a thought worth exploring? It doesn't see…  [+] (2 replies) 10/26/2016 on Goycott +1
User avatar
#38 - voxxyn (10/26/2016) [-]
Well, to be entirely honest I don't. I'm borderline sociopathic, having little to no empathy, so situations like this can genuinely confuse me.

Now, harming a person for pleasure or entertainment is wrong or so I've been told , but I'm not sure that the case in the comic directly compares to this.

Lets say that I put up a sign on my restaurant saying that no smokers are allowed. I'm discriminating against a group of people because I dislike how they act/look/smell, and their smoking makes my other customers uncomfortable. This is acceptable, and many restaurants actually do this. However, If I don't allow jews in my restaurant because I don't agree with their beliefs, which require me to go out of my way to provide meals catered to their kosher needs, with the potential consequences being (from their point of view at least) a hell of a lot worse than the smell of smoke... suddenly its terrible and monstrous and holy shit racism.

Discriminating against people because of their lifestyle choices in taking up smoking: OK
Discriminating against people because of their lifestyle choices in adhering to Judaism: Not OK

To me at least, these sets of rules defining what is OK and what isn't seem rather illogical and arbitrary in many cases. Which for me means literally having to learn what is 'right' and 'wrong' as I lack the empathy to determine it on the spot. While the comic uses a bad example to illustrate this, the point behind it is interesting. I mean, heck, even the idea of human life being sacred is ultimately nothing more than a social construct: one which appears increasingly damaging as problems like resource shortages and overpopulation become more and more widespread.
User avatar
#42 - jonluw (10/26/2016) [-]
I'm fairly certain it would be illegal for you to not allow smokers into your restaurant.
You can, however, choose to not allow smoking in your restaurant.
The difference being that in the first case you are discriminating against a group of people for a behaviour they engage at some other time of the day, whereas in the second case you are merely saying they cannot actively engage in this behaviour while they are your patrons.

In the same way:
There is nothing wrong with running a restaurant that doesn't serve kosher meat. You don't want to go to all that effort to accomodate a small customer base. Completely reasonable.
That is not the same as saying jews aren't allowed in your restaurant. Their beliefs don't require you to go out of your way to provide kosher meals. A jewish person could just fine come to your restaurant and order a salad or a glass of water, even though you're not trying to keep kosher.

Not serving specifically kosher food is not discriminating against jewish people.
Not allowing jewish people to eat at your restaurant, is.
Do you see the difference? In the first case, your menu isn't designed to accomodate a jewish diet. In the second case your menu still doesn't accomodate kosher, but you're also refusing to serve jewish people who would like to eat there regardless. Or who's coming along with friends.
#34 - You are correct, when we make decisions between things, we dis…  [+] (4 replies) 10/26/2016 on Goycott +1
User avatar
#35 - voxxyn (10/26/2016) [-]
Yup, pretty much. The fact that the same action can be good or bad depending on WHY you do it is an interesting thought.
User avatar
#37 - jonluw (10/26/2016) [-]
Is this really a thought worth exploring?
It doesn't seem particularly mysterious to me.

If I punch a punching bag full force for a minute, to vent off aggression, I'm a normal person. If I punch a person full force for a minute, to vent off aggression, I'm a murderer, most likely.

If I cut up a piece of meat, I'm making food. Normal human behaviour.
If I cut up a person, I'm hurting someone. Not normal human behaviour.

If I throw off a tirade of swear words into the the air out of frustration, I'm venting. Normal.
If I throw off a tirade of swear words at a person, I'm being mean. Not normal, unless provoked somehow.

If I hate a kind of food, that's completely normal and fine.
If I hate a race of people, I'm a racist.

Like... You get that, right?
Humans aren't inanimate objects. That our code of ethics implores us to treat them differently than say, food, really isn't very baffling.
User avatar
#38 - voxxyn (10/26/2016) [-]
Well, to be entirely honest I don't. I'm borderline sociopathic, having little to no empathy, so situations like this can genuinely confuse me.

Now, harming a person for pleasure or entertainment is wrong or so I've been told , but I'm not sure that the case in the comic directly compares to this.

Lets say that I put up a sign on my restaurant saying that no smokers are allowed. I'm discriminating against a group of people because I dislike how they act/look/smell, and their smoking makes my other customers uncomfortable. This is acceptable, and many restaurants actually do this. However, If I don't allow jews in my restaurant because I don't agree with their beliefs, which require me to go out of my way to provide meals catered to their kosher needs, with the potential consequences being (from their point of view at least) a hell of a lot worse than the smell of smoke... suddenly its terrible and monstrous and holy shit racism.

Discriminating against people because of their lifestyle choices in taking up smoking: OK
Discriminating against people because of their lifestyle choices in adhering to Judaism: Not OK

To me at least, these sets of rules defining what is OK and what isn't seem rather illogical and arbitrary in many cases. Which for me means literally having to learn what is 'right' and 'wrong' as I lack the empathy to determine it on the spot. While the comic uses a bad example to illustrate this, the point behind it is interesting. I mean, heck, even the idea of human life being sacred is ultimately nothing more than a social construct: one which appears increasingly damaging as problems like resource shortages and overpopulation become more and more widespread.
User avatar
#42 - jonluw (10/26/2016) [-]
I'm fairly certain it would be illegal for you to not allow smokers into your restaurant.
You can, however, choose to not allow smoking in your restaurant.
The difference being that in the first case you are discriminating against a group of people for a behaviour they engage at some other time of the day, whereas in the second case you are merely saying they cannot actively engage in this behaviour while they are your patrons.

In the same way:
There is nothing wrong with running a restaurant that doesn't serve kosher meat. You don't want to go to all that effort to accomodate a small customer base. Completely reasonable.
That is not the same as saying jews aren't allowed in your restaurant. Their beliefs don't require you to go out of your way to provide kosher meals. A jewish person could just fine come to your restaurant and order a salad or a glass of water, even though you're not trying to keep kosher.

Not serving specifically kosher food is not discriminating against jewish people.
Not allowing jewish people to eat at your restaurant, is.
Do you see the difference? In the first case, your menu isn't designed to accomodate a jewish diet. In the second case your menu still doesn't accomodate kosher, but you're also refusing to serve jewish people who would like to eat there regardless. Or who's coming along with friends.
#32 - Is there a canon explanation for why the people The Flash carr…  [+] (3 replies) 03/05/2016 on Flash`s feats 0
#37 - karlossacramento (03/05/2016) [-]
flash can control movement at the molecular level. that means that if he carries you, he actually accelerates all molecules in your body at once. Since everything accelerates uniformly, there is nothing which "lags behind" and gets ripped apart.
#34 - anon (03/05/2016) [-]
I assume it has to do with Speed Force (the source of his power)
User avatar
#33 - bloodwing (03/05/2016) [-]
yea i think so that electric aura you sometime see on him protect him from gravity and the like and when he carrys someone they are inside it
#11 - Of course that kind of people are nowhere to be seen in fields…  [+] (1 reply) 03/01/2016 on Robot fights back +2
User avatar
#21 - pittheus (03/01/2016) [-]
That's a bit of a generalization. I go to a super liberal school and there are loads of science majors here. It's also a school that's good for science not some shitty community college.
#33 - I'm not into this stuff, but I'd figure the master/slave commu…  [+] (3 replies) 01/30/2016 on misleading title +2
User avatar
#59 - penileburglar (01/30/2016) [-]
'Subset' wouldn't really quite be the right word, it's just a type of relationship. Some people are friends, some people are lovers, some people are master and slave. It's not really even all that indicative of what they do, 'master and slave' relationships vary wildly person-to-person.

But no, #24 and #33 are right, wearing a collar 24/7 is pretty rare. Even amongst those who participate in standing S&M relationships (which are arguably outnumbered by casual practitioners to begin with) most of us do have day jobs, and slave collars are rarely appropriate wear for such--the only people I know who wear their collar 24/7 are those who work in the fetish community, either making and selling fetish products or working at fetish clubs.
User avatar
#39 - burpityhatburp (01/30/2016) [-]
when you assume you make an ass outta u and me
User avatar
#36 - youngneil (01/30/2016) [-]
Wearing a collar all the time is never the norm.

user's friends