Mike's Home Page

You've all seen the meme of comparing unvetted immigrants to skittles. It's a poor metaphor, as many are, and this guy calls it out (my comments to follow):

 

Now, he's 100% correct that it's a poor metaphor. After that, every word he writes is incorrect, including "The," "and" and "of."

There will be brief pause while I drink enough Scotch to numb the agony my neurons suffer having to read this again as I refute.

Here we go:

1: You're not "Saving anyone from a war zone."  They did that themselves when they reached Turkey. They're displaced persons, but no one is going to shoot them dead there (or, at least not for the reasons claimed). We're not picking them up in Syria (the primary nation in question) or even in A-stan to speak of. And why can't they stay in nations where there are similar languages and cultures? If I was in their place, I'd prefer Canada or the UK to say, Mongolia.

2: Let's look at the metaphor and the reality both.  "I would GORGE myself on Skittles." Has he taken in any of the refugees who were here? No?  Then he's lying.  He intends to do nothing but be an internet virtue signaling loudmouth. If he took even one in, I'd respect him.  As far as gorging himself on Skittles, that would, in fact, be very bad for his health.

But that's where the metaphor breaks down, because he wants to force those Skittles to be dumped into my childrens' candy jar as well, and in the candy stores, and in the freebies at doctors' offices, so it's not just his life at stake. He arrogates to himself the right to expose everyone else to the poison.

And it's not just poison. Some of the Skittles/"refugees" are known to explode and take others with them, and butcher children's genitalia, and disfigure their own women, and attack local Western women for failing to meet their standards, and even molest children because of "Sexual emergency," as the defense in an Austrian case read.

3: And when he dies? Well, he expects others to die following his lead. (But again, he has yet to make any effort to actually do this, the internet hero). From his stupidity, in an attempt to prove he's not racist (we'll come back to that) (HINT: he's racist), we're supposed to learn that it's a good thing to embrace potentially hazardous unknowns.

He also conveniently glosses over the fact that these displaced persons will each need money and support. For each one we take in, one of our people is not getting that same help.  It either requires a lot of people to step up with money and housing (but not him, obviously), or it critically impacts our economy.

Oh, and they're going to need jobs, which last I heard were in short supply. So apparently, "liberals" do believe Trump can fix the economy. Or else they were too busy virtue-signaling to think.

4: He offers no explanation for how this makes the world a better place. The US already gives away literal megatons of food, sends ships with supplies, generators, water distillation equipment to most major disasters, and takes in 40,000-70,000 a year in legal refugees, AND STILL IS RIGHT NOW, other than from 7 of the countries 0bama had a tendency drone-strike with regularity. And now they're pissed at us. Go figure.

5: "Racist." The default bleat of a "liberal" cocksucker who has no logical argument to make.

A: "Muslim" is not a race.

B: Muslims were not named, only everyone from given nations, INCLUDING the Jewish, Christian and Atheist residents who are at more risk there than other Muslims.

C: In fact, per the USG, Arabs are "White." So are Persians.  They're also Asian, due to the "liberal" need to pigeonhole everyone, because Israelis, Koreans, Yupiks, Turks and Sri Lankans all look alike, I guess.  So, who's actually the racist here? And Afgans are Asian, but indistinguishable from Pakistanis...who are still allowed to enter the US.  So no, "Race," or what "liberals" like to claim is race, has nothing to do with it.  Grow up.

6: And is his life worth more than theirs?  Apparently so, because this racist cock still doesn't have a single fucking "Refugee" in his house.

And yes, I value my life, and my childrens' lives, over a random stranger's. Though unlike the shitbag, I actually did put mine on the line for 25 years in the US military, and went to that part of the world twice, and served on several humanitarian missions in the US.

So he can go fuck himself, because he's a fucking pussy.

 

Try this simple test:

Go pick up a random homeless person right now, and put them in your house.

No? Why not? 

Oh, you're afraid this random homeless person will steal your stuff or trash the place?

Well, what if a good friend could vouch for them, and brought them to you personally? 

That's more acceptable?

I agree.

We call that process, "Vetting."

Stop being a virtue-signaling hypocrite. Actually do something to help.

       
 
 
 
Literally every statement in this op ed is counterfactual. That level of "Error" is impossible without deliberate intellectual fraud and dishonesty. From this alone, any statement you'd make on any subject would lack credibility in any professional setting.
 
So what I'm hearing is SUNYC is a worthless diploma mill with "professors" who are unable to grasp facts or present them honestly. 
 
I see you are a Cornell "grad."  I had already concluded from previous incidents that Cornell no longer has any credibility as an institute of "learning."
 
Do not attempt to argue with me on this subject. I have 25 years military and a decade civilian experience in the field. You are an ignorant, hysterical fool.  It is a shame and disgrace to our nation that you are allowed to teach.
 
You are a disgrace to intellectual honesty, morally corrupt, a complete fraud.and an overpaid welfare case wasting our tax dollars.
 
 
Thanks
 
Mike
 
--
 
 
 
 
 

Robert Spitzer <Robert.Spitzer@cortland.edu>

2:52 PM (41 minutes ago)
 
   
to me
 
 
 
 
 
 

Hello Mr. Williamson, thanks for your email. As you fail to cite any specific instance of “counterfactual” information in my op-ed, there is little to say, other than that I’m perfectly comfortable standing behind the information and arguments I present, and that I really did obtain my graduate degrees at Cornell University. And SUNY Cortland is a fine public undergraduate-oriented institution of higher education, although it does not need my stamp of approval to verify that.

Regards,

Bob Spitzer

 

 

 

From: Mike Williamson ] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 2:08 PM
To: Deborah Dintino < eborah.Dintino@cortland.edu" target="_blank">Deborah.Dintino@cortland.edu>
Subject: RE: Prof Spitzer article

 
 
 
 
 

Mike Williamson >

3:34 PM (0 minutes ago)
 
   
to Robert
 
 
 
 
 
 
Suppressors, at most, reduce noise signature about 38dB, meaning the firearm will still be at least as loud as a nailgun. Supersonic bullets still generate supersonic cracks. The weapons are still audible. They are simply less damaging.
 
Since you clearly have done zero research in this subject, even a rudimentary google search, I will remind you what you should have learned about 7th grade--decibels are a logarithmic scale, so reducing from 150-170 decibels to 120-130 is significant, but the latter is still quite loud. Not to worry, no one will make any "silent" assassinations like in that documentary "Mr And Mrs Smith."
 
Suppressors add bulk and expense to a weapon, something criminals are unlikely to do. They also get hot in use, meaning anyone sticking it down their pants (for example) will get burned.
 
Would you make a similar ridiculous claim that unmuffled cars provide "safety" to pedestrians? And help police locate them?
 
Had you done that rudimentary search, you'd find that reducing the noise on shooting ranges, frequently made of concrete, will reduce sound pressure levels to that which "merely" require plugs, not muffs, and won't cause physical pain, and in the case of defensive shootings inside the house, help prevent damage or deafness.
 
You clearly not only have zero professional training, you couldn't even be bothered to use google, then passed your hysterical, hoplophobic bias off as argument from authority because of your degrees in poli sci.
 
You are an ignorant fraud, a moral coward, and intellectually corrupt. You have nothing of value to teach anyone in any subject.
 
I stand by MY statement that any institution that would certify or employ someone of your "abilities" is not credible.  I've seen similar verbarrhea from other Cornell grads.  It seems they stopped actually caring about content and facts sometime in the mid 80s.
 
I'll bet your thesis is great comedy. Researched, no doubt, from fine sources such as Mother Jones and DU.
 

Robert Spitzer

4:07 PM (36 minutes ago)
 
   
to me
 
 
 
 
 
 

Hello Mr. Williamson, I did not have the space to go into relative degrees of sound generated by firearms, but as you know, there are thousands of types of firearms, from derringers to elephant guns, and they generate very different levels of noise. At the firing range in particular, there are many very good ear protective devices available to resolve the noise problem for shooters. When silencers were unregulated, they were indeed used by criminals, which is why they were regulated in the first place under the 1934 NFA, and there would be considerable incentives for at least some criminals to obtain them if they were more easily available and untraceable to the owners. As for automobiles, there is a new regulation requiring electric cars to make noise when operating at low speeds for the very reason of safety.  QCRkdM8jCK84ZCQ">http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/quiet-hybrid-electric-cars-must-make-noise-new-u-s-safety-rule/

Regards,

Bob

 

Robert J. Spitzer, Ph.D.

Distinguished Service Professor

Department Chair

Political Science Department

SUNY Cortland

Box 2000

Cortland, NY  13045

607)%20753-4106" target="_blank">607-753-4106 (office)

607)%20756-6756" target="_blank">607-756-6756 (home)

robert.spitzer@cortland.edu

http://www2.cortland.edu/departments/political-science/faculty-staff-detail.dot?fsid=312710

https://sites.google.com/site/robertspitzercortland/

 

Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 3:34 PM
To: Robert Spitzer
Subject: Re: FW: Prof Spitzer article

 
 
 
 
 

Mike Williamson

4:44 PM (0 minutes ago)
 
   
to Robert
 
 
 
 
 
 
This would move them from NFA to GCA. If you don't know what that means, I encourage you to do some research. They'd still be "regulated," and their purchase recorded.
 
They are unregulated in any number of civilized countries, including NZ. The UK only requires a valid firearm certificate to own them.
 
PhDs have been used in crime. Bleach has been used in crime. Carb cleaner has been used in crime. That argument is specious.
 
These same arguments were made about concealed carry, "assault weapons," "Saturday night specials," ad nauseum.  In every case, the hyperbole was proven ridiculous.
 
I'd be happy to educate you on the subject, but it was obvious from the beginning that your biases and phobias trump your rational brain.
 
I did not mention electic cars, and we're not discussing bows (which are much quieter than firearms). Would you argue that a gasoline or diesel powered car shouldn't be quieted at all, for "Safety"? BTW, the early suppressors were modeled off car mufflers.
 
Suppressors don't "silence" anything. The quietest setup I'm aware of is still about 115 decibels. That's a fairly bulky .22 rifle that no one has ever used in a murder I'm aware of.

As far as a "readily available" "unregulated" silencer, that's called a 2 liter soda bottle, or an oil flter, and some duct tape. Again, this is readily findable on google in 30 seconds, complete to Youtbue videos (though you should be aware that most of those cameras don't accurately record sound).  If any gangbanger wanted that, it would take less than a minute to fabricate, would make his weapon bulkier, and still wouldn't actually "silence" it.

Nor do laws prevent criminals from acquiring anything.
 
My statement stands. You are willfully ignorant and arguing from an authority you don't possess, with dishonest approach and intent.
 
If you decide you'd actually like to witness, or, horrors, use a suppresssed weapon on the range to understand exactly what they look, feel, sound and perform like, under professional supervision, I can arrange it.

I think it's just hilarious listening to Commiefornicators talk about how big, brave, California is going to quit Trumpistan and go elsewhere.

First, I'd like to address an issue that always comes up with this--the Democrat and "liberal" claim that California is a net producer revenue wise, and all us "lesser" states should be beholden to them.  Notice that first we should "All pay our share to help the less fortunate among us." But as soon as they can create a claim that they pay more than they get, suddenly those poor states are a drain on their mighty wealth.

IOW, they turn into what they claim Republicans are.

There Is No Such Thing As An Intellectually Honest Democrat. There Cannot Ever Be, Because The Root Philosophy Is Based On Dishonesty And Greed.

Now, back to Cumstainfornia:

Anyone thinking this just isn't actually thinking.

First of all, a large chunk of CA's income is from air and sea ports bringing in huge amounts of goods from Asia and the Pacific, for the US.  If they stop being part of America, there are three ways this plays out:

A: They continue to make the stuff available at a fair price, and simply become a de facto American protectorate.

2) If they refuse, Oregon and Washington thank them greatly for the YUGE increase in business, and CA withers and dies. The end.

c} If they get those states to go along with them, Florida, Texas, the Carolinas and Louisiana will thank them for the business and prices will go up slightly, but not a lot, because orders of scale matter, and CA withers and dies, taking OR and WA with them. The end.

Second, CA better make a good deal on that, or they can kiss the Southwestern power grid, fuel, and water from the Colorado River goodbye. We'll swap them even--one container of imported goods, one gallon of drinking water or megawatt hour of power.

Third, CA is taking 12% of the US debt, based on population. Failure to do so is grounds for the IRS to collect, with help from the US Army if needed, just like we did to those Confederate Democrats when they decided they were too good for civilized society.

Speaking of which:

Yeah, those federal installations.  Those belong to the US. I guess you can keep the infrastructure, at fair market value, and 12% of the Federally owned equipment and weapons, as long as you take that debt we discussed. And if you refuse? Remember that previous civil war we just discussed?  

Also, you can find your own damned troops, pilots and sailors for them, take over your own training, pay for your own goddamn defense of those sea lanes that are now your problem, not ours. You may not have actually priced what a destroyer, or even a frigate costs these days, nor an F16 in a current block, nor even a quarter million uniforms, rifles, backpacks and the relevant trucks.

So the entire proposal comes from smoking too much Medical Marijuana. If CA actually tries this, they'll be a third world country in short order.

The good news is they might actually get rid of all the illegal Mexicans. The bad news is, it will either be because their economy will be worse than Mexico's, or because they get absorbed by Mexico.

So in the end:

They'll scream like little bitches.

They'll throw some tantra and astroturf some riots.

They'll stay in the US, to their and our detriment.

 

Fucking pussies.

David Mott Michael, we've talked about why posts that depict, encourage, or incite harm (including self-harm) are inappropriate. 

This is your second notice.
1 · 2 hrs
Benjamin Blatt
 
Benjamin Blatt I can't tell if you're being serious, but, and you may take this as legal advice if you are, in fact, serious, you should go away, like right now.
Benjamin Blatt's photo.
Like · 1 · 1 hr
Darryl AE Hadfield
 
Darryl AE Hadfield David, this is the first time that I've had to tell you that you're a whiny pussy, and how your attempts to control (either directly or indirectly) are inappropriate.

Do not transgress again.
Like · 1 hr
David Mott
 
David Mott My notices on these posts are a courtesy to Mike, whom I respect, and who I'm sure understands the possible impact that they may have on his status as a speaker and vendor at various conventions.

It's really up to him if the entertainment value here i
s worth the impact on those other hobbies. 

Also, you haven't been paying attention. He took down the first post for which I put him on notice. I presume it's because he's actually a decent human being.
Darryl AE Hadfield
 
Darryl AE Hadfield I... "haven't been paying attention" Because I didn't see a post that was taken down?

Your logic game needs to be stepped up a notch or 12.

As for your other comments... It's one thing to send someone a note privately - which, if we're going to talk "status as a speaker and vendor at various conventions" is probably a far better way of communicating with him.

I'ts another thing entirely to post a publicly condescending comment with an SJW-styled recrimination.
David Mott
 
David Mott I did privately ask if he'd like to receive input in a different manner; his response did not indicate a preference. In this way, I can collect screenshots that these issues have been brought to his attention. 

SWJ-style? Shit, I haven't reported this
 post to FB yet. SWJ (often) leaves no room for conversation. That's not who I am. I know that Mike has a full plate at the moment, so this can sit here until he has bandwidth to address it. 

Also, perhaps, there can be some civil discourse in the meantime.
Darryl AE Hadfield
 
Darryl AE Hadfield "I can collect screenshots"

Why, pray tell, would you need to track your commentary to him?


"I haven't reported this post to FB yet."

I'm certainly not enjoying the tone of your commentary.

"SWJ (often) leaves no room for conversation. That's not who I am."

Ohhhhh... so you're a MODERATE sjw who will condescend and try to publicly shame someone in order to coerce them to do as you feel is appropriate.

Yeah, gonna go with... you're one of the types of people I shall not engage in discussion with, moving forward. The mentality you display is alarming at best, and sinister at worst.
Michael Z. Williamson
 
Michael Z. Williamson David Mott I have no idea what other post you're referring to, but if my posts offend you, you're welcome to ignore them. That's a hint. Please take it.

Also, I have no idea who you are other than someone on FB and one of the thousands of people I r
ecognize from the hundreds of thousands I meet.

And he's your president in 64 more days, and mine, whether we voted for him or not.

And as for "Not reporting it yet," that's all I need to know. Bye.
Like · 2 · 2 mins
 
~~~
 
Seriously, I don't give a fuck who the fuck you think you are online, I don't take fucking orders on what I fucking say.  Go read something less offensive, like Dick and Jane books.
 

Once again, we have a high profile shooting, and once again, the hysteria is out in force.

Let's start with some facts:  If you don't shoot, or have only occasionally shot on a range, then your opinion on how useful an armed respondent would be is garbage.  If you don't drive a car, you aren't qualified to tell professional drivers what they should have done in an accident.

Seriously, shut up, you're an idiot.

Second, everything is a cost-benefit and risk analysis.  Would a defensive shooter have made a difference? We can never know. We can know that it has helped before.

Here are some ways it can help:

The defensive shooter engages the hostile. The hostile must choose to ignore, take cover, or return fire.

If he chooses to ignore it, he remains a target and the odds of him being shot increase, and if he is shot, the engagement ends, and no further lives are lost. If this happens before he quits or runs out of ammo, it is a NET POSITIVE for the group.

If he takes cover, he is not shooting for a few moments, and in that few moments, more people can escape or formulate an attack. (Barstools can be as deadly as bullets, when thrown or swung.)  NET POSITIVE.

If he returns fire, anyone not in the cone near the defensive shooter is not being shot at. This is a NET POSITIVE for all those people, and a slight negative for those in the defender's immediate position.

It is possible the defender will hit a bystander in the process.  However, as he is deliberately choosing a single hostile target, the odds still improve for the remainder, and if the hostile is hit, the engagement stops. This is probably still a net positive.

The defender may be hit. Negative for him, but he accepted that risk. And in those few seconds, the fact is that more victims can escape or respond. This is still a NET POSITIVE for the GROUP.

Yes, the defender may decide his best course of action is to flee. If so...there is no negative nor positive for the group. They remain as they were.

But, this assumes an engagement takes place. Knowing certain areas contain a lot of defensive shooters, attackers tend to avoid them. NET POSITIVE for the group.

The only way to imagine a major negative is to assume that everyone carrying a gun for defense is some psychotic nutjob just waiting to break and spray bullets. There are zero studies or statistics to support this allegation.

This belief comes about from several issues. First, hoplophobia--a fear of weapons.  

Occasionally, it comes from projection. A person with poor impulse control assumes everyone else likewise is prone to outbursts, and of course, if they have a gun, they might act out with it, even though that occurence is demonstrably very rare. The overwhelming majority public and/or mass shootings are premeditated. They even frequently project their small penises into the argument. (Yes, that was deliberate contempt and turnabout on my part.)

Most commonly, it comes from fear and helplessness.  The promoter of these memes knows that in such an event, they'd be helpless, crying, and nothing but a victim waiting to be slaughtered.  More terrifying than that is the notion that NOT EVERYONE IS.  Some people might actually be able to control such a situation.  This means those people are more competent than the poster. It's a frightening notion that random death can visit us, but more offensive and jealous-making is the idea that it isn't just random, that some can change the odds in their favor and not be victims.

The sheep mentality, particularly among "liberals," is that everyone must be equal--equally poor, equally ignorant, equally helpless.

The only thing more outrageous than a killer is inequality, wherein better people (sometimes) survive. The most important thing to these people is to convince the competent that they're really not, or at least convince themselves of that, even if it takes trite, ignorant meme wars and blocking those who'd inform them otherwise.

They don't want education, they cherish their ignorance and fear. 

And they're what's wrong with humanity.

While some say we should pity them, I hold that their deliberate, cherished ignorance and cowardice makes them unsalvageable.

Simply remind them that they're worthless cowards, and be the best prepapred person you can be.  It may not matter, but it will not hurt.

BTW, if every building has fire extinguishers, why do we still have fires?

 

 

Several of us were having a nice, friendly sargasm when this person stopped by to tell all of us she knows more about us than we do, what horrible people we are, and why can't we be just like her ideal?

We declined the invitation.

 


Wyman Cooke shared Sean Faircloth's photo — with Michael Z. Williamson and Tad Williams.

Unless Vermin Supreme wins, in which case it'll be The First Outright Lunitic President.

  

 

Comments

 George Avery I would complain about the insult if I were a flesh-eating lizard person

 Patrick Culley I for one welcome our new reptilian overlords.

 Garry Hamilton First communist president. I don't think he's our first Jewish guy.

 Michael Z. Williamson He is, but is he practicing Jew or just sort of Jewish?

 James Stepanek he's not practicing at all from what I understand

 George Avery Lieberman was the first Jewish candidate for President OR Vice President. We have never had a Jewish President or Vice President. Barry Goldwater was of Jewish ancestry, but an Episcopalian.

 Ivan Batinic Fuck you and your Trump -ass holiness

 Garry Hamilton Jewish or not, active or not, his deep commitment to the principles of communism is more important and significant.

 Garry Hamilton Ivan Batinic ... ???

 Ivan Batinic I don't think he's communist. But I should not assume that meant you wee pro Trump. I hate texting.

 Catherine Baker If only you understood what communism was, but then you wouldn't be an murikan.

 Garry Hamilton A little research will help with that. I'm married to a researcher. I get that stuff for free. He's a commie. I'm not gonna bother with nuance and hedging. And I don't give a rat's rectum who the GOP puts up, I will vote for him and campaign for him. There is no scenario where I vote for a communist or a pathological liar/traitor, and that's all the Dems have put forward this time out.

 Catherine Baker Uh huh. I'm sure someone with a sold gold conservative mindset was *strongly* considering voting D. No really, totes believe you, dude.

 Keith Beavis

  

  Liam McCumber But can he get the trains to run on time?

 Garry Hamilton Conservative. Heh. I chuckled.

 Michael Z. Williamson There are Dems I will vote for. Hillary, Bernie and Trump are not three of them. Yes, Trump is much closer to a Dem than a Rep. Bernie is a socialist, not a liberal, and Hillary is a right-statist. I also wasn't born an American, know exactly what a communist is, and can even invoke former Soviets to discuss it with you. In fact, let me do that. Nicki Kenyon, Oleg Volk, please enlighten the lady. Tossing around ego will not get you anywhere on my wall.

 Nicki Kenyon

  

  Nicki Kenyon I just love how American born ignorants who have never lived the horror try to privilegesplain to those of us who have what communism is. I'm so done with these people!

 Henry Willard Garry, the kind of Scandinavian-style Nordic capitalism/social democracy that Bernie Sanders promotes and communism aren't even in the same wing of economic spectrum. The Nordic model works within the capitalist system -- private ownership of enterprise still runs the show from the industrial level down to the small business level. What social democracy, or 'democratic socialism' does, is to have a universal redistributionist policy where the goal is to create as much financial equality -and- individual financial autonomy as possible. In Nordic countries, their corporations and capital are seen to serve their own citizens, as opposed to the United States where a handful of private individuals (regardless of their nationality and regardless of what they intend to do with that money) can own and extract huge streams of money from the American economy and do whatever they want with it, even if its antagonistic to American interests. You might not agree with Nordic capitalism, but it is not communism, because there is no command economy there. If you still believe it to be, can you please share with us your broad definition of communism? Because if in your view communism means 'redistribution' (which is not correct), then I have news for you: the US is by that definition communist, because the government redistributes billions of dollars from taxpayers to wealthy corporations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

 Michael Z. Williamson Henry Willard Actually, the government redistributes money FROM corporations, which is to say, from the customers. And your definition of US capitalism is biased to the point of caricature.

 Garry Hamilton I've lived in Scandinavia. Several years. Had a couple of marriages, a couple of kids there. The idealized perception that some Americans have of Denmark is quite distorted. I'm sure that, with actual research, this could be corrected, but research doesn't seem to be in vogue lately. When I tell you that we really don't want Denmark in America, it's not derived from rumors, biased reportage, or Wikipedia. My love for the Danes does not transfer to their system of government. Socialism really, really doesn't work. You can flavor it all you like, but it's fundamentally broken. What is this obsession with trying to find the clean end of that turd? It's busted. Quit confirming Einstein's definition of insanity, and let's embrace the only thing that has lifted mankind out of its native state of poverty. Command economies don't work. Parasite economies don't work. Free enterprise works. Let's do that.

 Henry Willard Where did you live in Denmark? What did you do? I'm sorry if I sound skeptical, but half the conservatives I've spoken to about it have apparently lived in Scandinavia, which I find an astounding fact. I've traveled there and have friends who live in Copenhagen and Stavanger, so I don't really account your argument for authority to hold much weight because I know the economies are doing well by virtually any metric. Do you believe Denmark to be a command economy, and why do you think their system of government is flawed? Having lived there, I'm sure you're aware, the government has no control of industrial production and companies like Novo Nordisk and Mærsk do, and all of the Scandinavian countries (including Denmark) have a higher % of small business employment and a higher % of self-employment than the USA does. So by what measure is Denmark a 'command economy' and by what metrics are you judging these economies? Denmark has a higher standard of living than the US and an after-tax higher median income bolstered by extremely high wages compared to the US. https://cepr.net/.../publications/small-business-2009-08.pdf

 Garry Hamilton I lived in Copenhagen. I was an international telex operator, among other things. My first in-laws lived in Goteborg/Gothenburg. My second in-laws lived in Farum, outside Copenhagen. He worked as an engineer for the the country's foremost elevator manufacturer. Had his own car. Free-standing house. Very well to do, by Danish standards. Capital flight laws. Horrific taxation. "Free" medical (both kids). "Free" education. Paid for with those horrific taxes. I was making low wages, and my tax rate was 40%. If it hadn't been for subsidies (via my wife) we could not have afforded our cold water flat. Higher standard of living? My "standard of living" was a freaking cold water flat. And that was subsidized, cuz Danish wife. Have you BEEN there? You have any idea what it costs to drive a stinking car over there? Like I said, the US perception is distorted and romanticized. My advice to those who want to live "like they do in Denmark" is GO LIVE THERE. If you're still happy after ten years, change your citizenship. I won't be the least bit offended. Me, I've been. I'm staying here. And I'm not adopting a parasitic taxation and "free everything" model.

 Henry Willard I know people who live in Copenhagen who have the opposite experience, and I can show you some horror stories of folks who live with me here in Texas. Shall we compare and contrast? Forbes Magazine's #1 Best Country for Business? Denmark. Highest investment rating in Europe, highest monetary freedom. So tell me another one about capital flight and how it's communist, please. http://www.forbes.com/places/denmark/

 Denmark - Forbes

Denmark #1 Best Countries for Business - Forbes

forbes.com

 Garry Hamilton Capital flight laws may have changed. Dunno. It's been nearly forty years. I don't believe I said capital flight laws were communist. I do, however, find them oppressive. Your mileage may vary. Enjoy your stay there. I'll be here, suffering, in the States. 

 

 Adam Newton Historic/Catastrophic same difference...

*edit to add, I'm OK with Cruz being elected...

 Michael Z. Williamson Only racists would oppose Cruz or question his citizenship.

 Edward Lindeman I think he is a douche. does that make me a bigot?

 Curtis Pritchard wow I am not a racist and I oppose Cruz and I also do not think he should be allowed to be Pres. he had a Non-American Father and born in Canada so to me I will not vote for him on that if you feel that makes me a racist then you are just wrong. it only means I have a right to choose whomever I want for whatever reason.

 Michael Z. Williamson Curtis Pritchard No, but that makes you anti-immigrant, even though legally he's not an immigrant.

 Adam Newton Michael Williamson, or he's just willfully ignorant to the laws regarding qualification for presidency.

 Curtis Pritchard I do not think it does my wife was not born here so your wrong on that as well I will not vote for any foreign born for Pres. its a preference it makes me American since I have the right to chose with my vote and Adam I am not ignorant of the Law I went to law school I just do not believe anyone should be Pres if not born on American soil.

 Adam Newton What you believe or feel doesn't change what's been the law for far longer than you've been alive...

 Curtis Pritchard I did not say it did what I said was my opinion which is my right and that it does not make me a racist.

 Curtis Pritchard and for the record the clause being used to say he is eligible is ambiguous and can be or may need clarity by the Supreme Court

 

 Michael Z. Williamson I need to see evidence that Hillary is female. No, not photos, thank you.

 Richard K. Hopkins Those could be faked either through Photoshop or surgery.

 Robert Vance Like everything else in her life.

 Judy Rudek Be careful what you wish for... Rule 34, you know...

 Alan French Video...

 Thomas Stewart Alan French I think the video has her with Janet Reno. You have been warned.

 Alan French No, the one I'm thinking of is Ron Jeremy with Hillary and Maggy Thacher...

 

Catherine Baker So many misogynists, so little effort.

 Nick Gardner And who exactly are the misogynists?

 Catherine Baker As this is the first post you've made in this thread, it seems likely that you are not under discussion. Isn't that nice?

 Michael Z. Williamson Not at all. There are numerous women qualified to be president. Hillary is not one of them. Just as there are many black men qualified to be president. 0bama is not one of them. I don't think Trump or Bernie are qualified either. That doesn't make me anti-business or anti-semitic. Hillary is a detestable human being. Were she theoretically male, I'd ask for proof she was actually a man. But we can easily see who the sexist is in the thread.

 Catherine Baker And who better than a white man to explain, using small words, to wimmenz and blacks just what moveable bar they need to jump to be 'qualified'. Yes, yes, you can name THOUSANDS of black men who would be qualified. Or ten. Maybe. Because... black. Or wimmenz.

Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker Obviously, you came here to insult people, not have a debate. I bet you wonder why no one likes you.

Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker I'm noting your anti-immigrant sentiment, though. I bet you think you can justify it somehow.

 Catherine Baker My mum emigrated. My grandparents emigrated. My great-grandparents emigrated. My nieces & nephews have emigrated. Yep. I'm all anti-immigrant. How well you know me. I came to bring what everyone else does - a pov. It doesn't include accepting racism and misogyny silently -- oops. Bad wommanz.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker Oh, yes, some of your family were immigrants. Well, that makes it all okay, then. The only racist and sexist in the thread is you. In fact, you seem to know everything about every segment of society, and can tell people you've never met exactly what they're thinking and why they're wrong about it. Perhaps there's a point in there.

 Robert Boyer Fuck you Catherine. How about that? If someone disagrees with you then they're a misogynist. Eat a slimy dick. There you should feel great. That's what I would tell a man who was an asshole.

 Nathan Gayle Maybe, She has the,"Gift," us Menz lack...

 Michael Z. Williamson I don't think anyone here is anti-woman. Just anti-Catherine, because she's obnoxious. If everyone you meet is an "ist," it could be you're the noun they're ist against, not any group.

 Rick Drayson Why is it that in an age where so many Feminists are pushing to end the stereotype that females are illogical, none too intelligent and overly emotional that there are so many Feminists like Catherine Baker being fucking stupid sexist illogical retards

 Brad Johnson I've been watching this thread for a while now, from what I've seen all you have done is reply to fairly civil discourse with nothing but insults and condescension. BTW: you do know that there is a difference between "immigrate" and "emigrate" right?

 Rick Drayson Brad Johnson Can't take the Cunt out of Feminist

 Brad Johnson Well, there are feminists and Feminists. One you can actually have a civil discussion with and the other is pretty much this.

 Rick Drayson Brad Johnson What mythological creature do you speak of? I have only met the vile man hating rabid cultist(feminist) and the people who ASSume that they are feminist without knowing one thing about feminist ideology

 Michael Z. Williamson I think there should be more women in this thread. Amanda Fuesting, Heather Morgan, are you free?

 Rick Drayson Michael Z. Williamson The number of female anti-feminists is very heartening and certainly growing. (me assuming that those two you mentioned are that)

 Catherine Baker If only women would state their views in a manner pleasing to men. That's the problem, right there. Not saying shit men don't want to hear in a way they'll be happy to hear it.

 Brad Johnson No, the problem is you being rude and obnoxious. Simple as that. If you can't manage simple civility then you are worthy only of scorn and insults. Male or female makes no difference in that regard. BTW you never answered my question: Do you know the difference between "immigrate" and "emigrate?"

 Rick Drayson Catherine Baker Did Daddy walk out on you and Mumma? There is no better time than the present to start talking about your hatred of men which is normally caused by Daddy issues

 Catherine Baker Offering an opinion while female. I guess its almost as offensive as accepting Hillary as female without getting to personally finger her to be really sure. But why would anyone find that comment rude? Its just being politically thorough, and a woman who would find that offensive obviously has daddy issues. Cuz... well, they're female, so duh.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker But you demand men express opinions in a manner pleasing to women. Sexist.

 Michael Z. Williamson Please, gentlemen, don' t call her a cunt. Cunts have warmth and depth.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker Gender is distinct from sex. One can be physically one sex and identify chromosomally or psychologically as either or both. So you're also transphobic. Looks like anyone who disagrees with you is somehow wrong, and you're right about everything. You know more about communism than escaped Soviets, more about Judaism than practicing Jews, more about immigration than immigrants, more about Hispanic issues than Hispanics. All of us were having a discussion and some humor at the whole thing, and you stomped in to tell us we're all wrong and some sort of ---ist because you don't like it. You're a complete piece of shit. And you'd still be a complete piece of shit if you were a trangender black atheist male.

 John Kincaid Read this whole side thread. Shook my head wondering why someone would start shit like this. Dropping a bullshit comment meant to inflame people that had nothing to do with the original post. If you get butthurt over your treatment here Catherine, just refer to this jewel posted on your wall:

  

  Brett Bowen Let me get this straight. Not endorsing Obama or Hillary means you are a racist or a sexist. Did I get that right? And thinking they are terrible for the position means that you are arbitrarily moving the bar because you're a racist, sexist, patriarchal menace? Boils down to: you can't disagree with any of her designated candidates without being an "ist". And no defensible arguments have been put forth.

 Robert Boyer She's a misandrist ass. Simple as that.

 Heather Morgan I say shit men don't like all the time. I say shit women don't like too. The difference, dear special snowflake, is knowing why and when it's appropriate. And feminists don't see men as scary or hateful. We're supposed to be equal you twat, not special. Sexism is treating others different because of gender. So far Catherine, all i see is you. Way to play the victim. Do you carry your own outline chalk too?

 

Pater Familias What makes one a "Jew"? A theological belief or DNA? Consider what makes one a Muslim? Theology or DNA? Can one believe a theology and not practice it? If one does not practice a theology does one truely believe it? How would you know? If one claims to be something and does not live according to what that thing is what then is that person actually? A liar? A hypocrite? A fool? How much does one's DNA influence their behavior & beliefs? How would you know? What is more important, DNA, stated beliefs or pattern and practice of behavior?

 Steve Shook You can be a Jew by DNA or Theology, but you can only be a Muslim by theology.

Catherine Baker Obviously there is only one right or wrong answer, and I suspect you're in charge of setting the parameters.

 Garry Hamilton Traditionally, "Jewish-ness" is transmitted through the maternal side. I had this explained to me once, but I must confess I didn't quite grasp why that is. In the moslem world, I've been told that the son of a moslem is presumptively moslem. From what I understand, it's bad juju (like capital-bad) for a moslem's son to adopt a different faith. Again, my understanding is thin here.

 Steve Shook Science sets the rules, even though you can convert into Judaism itself the truth is Jews are a race of people, Muslims are not in anyway a singular race, regardless of anyone's philosophical prattle that remains an unalterable fact.

 Ivan Batinic OMG. I'm ducking out -- Ciao!

 Catherine Baker Ah, the confession. "Why iz wimmenz impoortant?" is a good question, and obviously "They not ever" is the answer. Your understanding isn't thin, it's Murikan! and therefore cannot be thicked, which is just eurononsense anyway.

 Steve Shook Catherine Baker What's that all about?

 Garry Hamilton She presumes to know the mind of someone across the interwebz. There is no clue, but at least there's certainty.

 Catherine Baker Well... let's just keep our minds on the "jewishness", shall we?

 Steve Shook It was the question.

 Michael Z. Williamson Jews actually do generally have genetic markers, being an insular people for the last several thousand years. Muslims are much broader spread, more proselytizing, and can be of any genetics whatsoever including South Asian, Pacific, East Asian, Altaic, Caucasian, North African and Berber, Central African, South African and any mix in between.

 Garry Hamilton It was asked. I proposed an answer. If the answer is wrong, I can always be enlightened. Not by a troll, of course, but a little light is always welcome.

 Michael Z. Williamson Garry Hamilton You were correct.

 Catherine Baker Troll: someone who doesn't agree with you

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker As you have proven, repeatedly.

 Steve Shook

  

  Robert Boyer No a fucking douche like you, Kitty. There, I ensmalled your name, go and cry foul.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker wommenz weren't even mentioned in this thread, other than as a legitimate part of Jewish tradition. So, your own statements mark you so far as anti-semitic, racist, sexist, and anti-immigrant. Do you want to tell Nicki Kenyon all about communism now, since she escaped from the USSR in the 80s and obviously can't know anything about the subject?

 Robert Boyer A non Liberal female's opinion means nothing.

 Steve Weinberg I think trying to parse Judaism as a "race" vs. a "theology" is going to be.... complicated. How much DNA do my German and Lithuanian forbears share? With the Sephardim? With the Ethiopians? I will note that there does to be some genetic commonality in the Cohain caste.

 Nicki Kenyon Michael Z. Williamson escaped JEW no less. Why do you bother with idiots?

 Eric Tank Nicki, I suspect masochism is at play - they seem to seek him out.

 Michael Z. Williamson Nicki Kenyon I have no idea where she showed up from. Not my Flist.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker has explained it, Steve Weinberg. What do you know? You're only a Jew. And male.

 Nicki Kenyon Eric Tank possibly. I've always thought Mike was a bit of a nut magnet. Must be why he and I get along so well.

 Eric Tank He certainly prompts interesting conversations. Which most of us really appreciate, especially the parts that drive the rest to frothing at the mouth.

 

 Jason Cordova Please. I doubt that Vermin Supreme would be our first lunatic president.

 Michael Z. Williamson He might be our best.

 Jason Cordova I'll give you that

 Robert Boyer First openly lunatic. 

 

Brad Johnson

   

 Rachel Dunlop Oh shit the lizard people have figured out how to access the internet!

 Doug Harrell My herpetology is weak. My first impression was that the picture is a komodo, rather than a monitor. However, after exhaustive research, I have concluded you are not dragon the wrong lizard into the comments...

 Ray Ficara Doug Harrell Komodos are monitorts. THe largest of the genus. BTW I used to have 5 at work reclining in a hot tub all day. They thought we were their maids.

 

 Dave M West Jr Cruz would also be the first president who isn't a natural born citizen...

 Seth Breidbart Not even close. George Washington was the first.

 Dave M West Jr A fair point, but it doesn't make Cruz any more eligible.

 Phillip Miehm Do you even citizenship? American mother, natural born American citizen. So, unless you have evidence that she renounced her citizenship at some point prior to his birth, Cruz is eligible. Even if he is an idiot.

 James R McCain Jr Only for idiots who dont know what a natural born citizen is as evidently you do not.

 Dave M West Jr Sure if you have no clue what the law actually says. Being called idiot by an idiot is actually a pretty strong compliment.

 Phillip Miehm Luckily for us, you are wrong. Ted Cruz is as much a natural born citizen as I am.

 Dave M West Jr Nope. Born in Canada to a US citizen and a Cuban national. Non-military births outside US territories require BOTH parents to be US citizens for the child to be considered a 'natural born citizen' which is a requirement of being the US president. Last time I checked Canada was a sovereign nation outside of US territory. All of this is easily researched if you're interested in actual knowledge instead of simple bias confirmation. Something tells me you aren't though.

 Michael Z. Williamson Dave M West Jr Please cite the SCOTUS ruling on what constitutes a "natural born" citizen.

While you look for that, you'll find that State Dept regs mandate ONE American parent who has lived 14 years in the US prior to the child's birth.

 We don't need and Cruz birthers.

 Dave M West Jr I've got some bad news for you: you're going to have Cruz Birthers if he gets the nomination. Count on it.

 Michael Z. Williamson Dave M West Jr JET FUEL CAN'T MELT IMMIGRATION PAPERS!

 Dave M West Jr LOL that's actually pretty funny.

http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/11/10/australias-secret-gun-problem-exposed/?fb_action_ids=1672808076337360&fb_action_types=og.likes

It turns out Australia has had ongoing, increasing violence since they banned most non-sporting arms.  Aha! THE FAULT IS THE BULLETS'!

And in comments:

Garavella Yk Bah, humbug • 18 days ago
if you read that article, more than half are not shootings: explosives, arson, unnamed slayings, gangland wars and so on
3 • Reply•Share ›

~~~~

Oh, well that makes them perfectly okay, then. As long as no one was shot.

DID YOU SERIOUSLY FUCKING SAY THAT? Explosives and arson aren't as bad as shootings, and certainly no one cares about unnnamed slayings (Whatever those are), and of course, gangland slayings, as long as they don't involve guns are perfectly fine!  That's how we're BETTER than the US!

What these people need is therapy, where they are put in a room with 57 loaded guns placed on every available surface, so they can get over their animistic fear of objects.  Or else play with the guns and wind up dead. Either way, human intelligence wins.

 TRIGGER WARNING: this post contains references to liberal intolerance, hypocritical butthurt and complete faggotry. Sensitive readers are warned.

 

For those of you who don't watch my Facebook wall (Probably a good thing), it's a war zone.  In the last week there've been defenses of the A10, attacks on the A10, jokes about the A10, a Christ On The Cross dress up doll, jokes about Muslim suicide bombers, about feminists, about conservatives, about anarchists, vegetarians, cops and starving children.

Now, humor is both a coping mechanism and a means of maintaining attention on an issue.  This is why Mel Brooks, for example, puts Hitler jokes into almost every movie.  Joking about issues can reduce their emotional impact, help us cope, while keeping us aware of the issue.

This is something most people know instinctively. Some have to be taught.

But a handful of people, who can be of any political or cultural affiliation, completely lose their shit.


Thus it was with this picture: 

 

This picture offended one Jim Long, who friended me about two days ago. 

Just so we're clear which Jim Long it is, here's his FB ID: https://www.facebook.com/jimffl83

Jim came into the thread and posted this:

 

   

Jim Long

November 2 at 10:50pm

 

   

As a FDNY firefighter I will never forget the horrors I've seen that day and to have an scumbag like you make light of the tragic events show what kind of character you have. I am unfollowing you Michael Z. Williamson.

 ~~~

Now, assuming Jim actually served on Sep 11, (he's a bit pudgy for the firefighters I know, but I don't know the NYFD guidelines) he has my respect FOR THAT ACTION.  I am not required to do so, but I do so, voluntarily. Doing so does not create an obligation on my part to respect any other action he may take in his life.

My response was, "Okay, bye."  Then others of us had a subthread discussion about how all the other humor above was fine, but this particular joke itched his anus.  I suppose I could not post anything that offended anyone, but that would be everything.

I could talk at this point at what Sep 11 meant to me, but the offended pussy will never get it, so we'll just note that I was serving military at the time, activated and deployed later in response, and had friends and family in close proximity to both the NY and Pentagon attacks, and move on.

 Now, here's how a man would have handled this offendedness:

Had he actually wanted to talk about his feelings, he could have attempted, in public or message, to have a discussion about it. We all could have learned something more about the event or our society from this. It would have been productive. Jim did not do this, because Jim is a moral coward.

He could have just ignored the post and moved on to something equally offensive but not relevant to him personally. Hypocritical, but people can be. Jim is more than hypocritical and a moral coward.

He could have just unfriended or blocked me and moved on with his life. But in addition to being a moral coward, Jim insists everyone else live by his rules.

So, Jim chose the Past Full Retard All The Way To Turnip Limpwristed Faggot and Triggered Liberal Outrage response of publicly telling me what a horrible person I am (wrong) and that he knows exactly what kind of person I am (Wrong, and I'm a complex person, as we all are).

Now, I cannot prove that two minutes later he reported his butthurt and full diaper to Facebook mods, but shortly after that, I was banned from posting for 30 days, and the post was removed.

So let's look at it again:  THIS WAS ON MY WALL.  The man asked for my contact, came into my internet living room, publicly complained about the party, then left and called the cops.

Now, I get complaints from time to time, and complaints like this invariably come from some liberal pussy (as opposed to liberals who are not pussies, whom I enjoy talking to and learn from) who wants the world to be as they envision it, and no dissent is allowed. (This isn't actually liberal.  It's passive-aggressive fascist.)(I'm also friends with real fascists to counter the real communists I'm friends with. I wouldn't want to live in their utopiae, nor they in mine, but we can learn from each other.  But I digress.)

So I contacted him in private. I told him he was a pussy, as face to face as I was able to get.

~~
He responded: Wrong on both accounts. Loser.

I guess your feeling a little guilty you need to private message me bullshit.

~~ 

Guilty? No, retard, it was the only way I had of contacting you, after you shit your panties and whined to the overworked drones at Fecesbook that YOU WERE OFFENDED!!!

Nobody gives a shit if you're offended, pussy.  Grow the fuck up.  I get offended, usually by the existence of liberal pussies (who can't spell to boot) such as yourself, a dozen times a day.  My response varies. If I think I can have a logical disagreement with someone, I do. Otherwise, the steps above outline how to deal with such things.

And I always love being called a loser.  I have a loving family, have raised kids who impress people, enough disposable income to pursue my hobby of an arms race with Bermuda, and a following and readership that runs up to a half million people who pay money specifically to read my stuff (and others who get it second hand).  I've got medals for helping save lives, and for helping take the war directly to the enemy. Interesting definition of a "loser," but since I don't know what his criteria are, I'm going to chalk it up to more passive aggressive "liberal" bullying intended to make me comply with his wishes.

But, since Jim finds my posting of a joke I find funny in my own forum to be so offensive it must be stopped, I am encouraging everyone with access to post it on my wall as often as possible for the duration of this ban. Or anything else offensive. 

You may choose to be more direct and post it on his wall. I am not requesting you do so, but I note he felt free to dictate how my wall looks.  It would be symmetrical for the same to happen in reverse.

Keep in mind your post will probably be reported by some "tolerant" "liberal," removed, and you may be banned from posting on Facebook for a duration between 12 hours and 30 days--it's entirely at the whim of the overworked drones at Fecesbook, who are forced to deal with butthurt little bitches all day long.

BTW, Jim, are you aware that reports by butthurt pussies take time to process, and have repeatedly caused the monitors to miss reports of actual crimes and suicide, where outside intervention might actually help someone? But hey, you were OFFENDED!  That's what's important here, you narcissistic little pussy.

People like you make me wish Sep 11 actually happened. (That was sarcasm, btw)

UPDATE:  It appears, after someone perused his info, that he may be a poser. Imagine that--stolen valor from NYFD. Rather low, I think: 

 

To My Stalker
Aug 10, 201506:32PM

Congrats. I have to hand it to you. It takes dedication to focus so exclusively on my Fecesbook wall you can catch things to be offended by, like this image I posted:

Or, you know, you could just go to the Humorless Pussy Little Bitch section of Fecesbook.

But that's nothing. You were dedicated enough to scroll back through an ENTIRE FUCKING YEAR of comments, not posts, to find something even older to get offended at. One that used "faggot" in its correct usage referring to a bundle of sticks, and even used the format of "A faggot (a bundle of sticks) of wood."  Thus proving that the Fecesbook monitors are retarded as you are obsessive.

Of course, that 12 hour ban was subsumed by the 30 day ban for the image above.

Not to rest on your laurels, you then went back to about the TWO YEAR MARK to find yet another comment to be offended about.

Now you're getting creepy.

Seriously, have you nothing better to do?

You went through possibly 50,000 comments.  You COULD have been researching how to cure a terrible disease.  You could have been creating great art.  If you were worth anything at all as a human being, that is. Since you're clearly not, you could have been masturbating to My Little Pony bondage porn.

Nope. You have nothing better to do with your life than read tens of thousands of my comments trying to...do what, exactly? I have three backup IDs, and any number of people who'll post on my behalf.

You are truly the most worthless piece of shit the human race has ever produced. There's nothing I need to do in response to you. You've long since done it to yourself.

And may God continue to wipe his ass with you.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/05/students-at-womens-college-upset-at-nearly-nude-statue-of-a-man/

A statue of a man in underwear, outside on the grounds.

From the article:

Others at the exclusive 2,400 student all-female private liberal arts institution are not buying any defense of the work.

Please, tell us all about the suffering and and repression you experienced in the The Hamptons.

“While it appears that this statue of a nearly naked, older white man with outstretched arms is an art installation, it does not provide our community with any of the value that art is traditionally intended to add,” wrote student Zoe Magid in the Change.org petition. The statue had “become a source of apprehension, fear, and triggering thoughts regarding sexual assault for many members of our campus community,” reads Magid’s petition.

[Citation needed]  That's a fairly authoritarian statement there. What are your credentials or qualifications to stand in judgment? As far as "Triggering," yes, that's a real issue. But guess what?  There are ACTUAL MEN in the real world.  Someday, you'll have to interact with them.  And while there's a legal term "Statutory rape," let me reassure you it has nothing to do with statues becoming incubi and molesting rich college chicks.

“I go to a women’s college so that I’m part of an inclusive and supportive community, not one that supports male artists and statues of naked men instead of women,” wrote student Raeesah Kabir on the Davis Museum Facebook page.

"Inclusive."  You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

Seriously, did you fail 3rd grade English? "Inclusive.  To include, encompass."  What you want is "Exclusive.  To exclude, ostracize."  So, real colleges are supposed to embrace the artistic, literary and verbal diarrhea of types like you, but you should be exempt from returning the favor?  How about, "No"? Does "No" work for you?  No?  Tough shit.  To be fair, the college is described as "Exclusive."  I guess she forgot to read the pamphlet.  If she can read.  I'll be fair.  I'll assume basic literacy is required for a degree in Haberdashery Studies.

“I think art’s intention is to confront, but not assault, and people can see this as assaulting,” Wellesley senior Annie Wang told the Boston Globe.

Actually, you don't think, and that's the first part of the problem.  But I notice how you couch it.  "People can see this as assaulting."  So, you don't personally, but others MIGHT. What if others MIGHT view unburqa'd women as assaulting?  Or do only your opinions matter?

“Wellesley is a place where we’re supposed to feel safe. I think place and a context matters, and I don’t think this is the place to put it.”

So, you're afraid of a completely inanimate object?  Does Mumsy still check under your bed for monsters before you go to sleep?  Grow up.

Others defended the work. “I find it disturbing, but in a good way,” Wellesley English professor Sarah Wall-Randell told the Globe. “I think it’s meant to be off-putting – it’s a schlumpy guy in underpants in an all-women environment.”

Well, good. At least one of their professors has a brain.  But it doesn't seem her intellect is rubbing off on the spoiled white upper middle class princesses in their imagined victimhood.

Matelli described his artistic philosophy ahead of the controversy. “I’m fascinated with that moment when you become aware of a perceptual shift in your environment, so what was a seemingly real-life experience becomes a complicated art experience. That approach to art is really powerful.”

I get it.  He has, in fact, drawn attention to their plight.  Perhaps they should go back home and stay out of the real world until they're ready to handle it.