Disqus - Latest Comments for Fousheezy

Re: I broke my leg last night

Fousheezy — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:49:31 -0000

Yup! I have a temporary cast on and crutches. I go to the orthopedist on Friday (feel free to send me food and company and sympathy)

Re: BRB, Losing all faith in men

Fousheezy — Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:32:05 -0000

Thanks Nik. I know- I was just being dramatic for reasons I'll explain to you when I see you this evening. You'll be horrified/proud of how I cheered myself up though :3

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/1254059149

Fousheezy — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 13:37:09 -0000

I was just thinking about you when I saw that! Haha :P

Re: Why is everyone flipping out about Prop 8? The decision is going to be appealed. Calm down.

Fousheezy — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 00:06:56 -0000

I just feel like the marriage part is a concession towards the religious. http://tinyurl.com/368npn2

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/489309492

Fousheezy — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:13:01 -0000

Gahh! You're so talented! BEST FRIENDS ~~.O.~~

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/486821766

Fousheezy — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:04:12 -0000

Ugh! I know! The lol wasn't even preceded by something humorous! It was being used as the ending punctuation! He may not capitalize the first letter of a sentence, but at least he remembered to capitalize god's name.

#jackpot

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/457009411

Fousheezy — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:57:07 -0000

God I wish. He's so fucking hot and talented

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/440657725

Fousheezy — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 17:03:33 -0000

Haha, you're just jeals

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/409242611

Fousheezy — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:45:38 -0000

I tried to think of the real villain in Finding Nemo, and I decided it was the separation of father and son. The sharks were scary, but they weren't really the villains of the movie. My post was about the drag queens who we were the obvious main antagonists.

Also, I didn't even know about Dame Edna, or else I would have given him an honorable mention. :)

Re: Check Your Footnotes

Fousheezy — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:17:40 -0000

With regard to the question you posted, I would think some variable wasn't being accounted for in the controls to skew the results, or the researcher was biased. If people were regrowing limbs while being prayed over, or somebody was prayed back to life, I'd have to seriously reconsider my stance on the absence of a supernatural world, or potentially consider that humans are now tapping into some new skill.

Re: Check Your Footnotes

Fousheezy — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:10:23 -0000

My friend Chris just posted a reply on facebook:

"i'm sure the post-prayer optimism and the subsequent release of various hormones had no impact whatsoever."

To which I replied:

"I think you just confessed that it's not the prayer that actually did anything, rather the placebo effect."

That being said, wouldn't it be easier to use a sugar pill and a lie rather than constructing an entire system of self delusion to the detriment of society?

Re: Passing thoughts, pressing dreams

Fousheezy — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:09:25 -0000

Is that last part Carl Sagan? It's beautiful.

Re: Experiments With the Highly Reactive Chemical Compound Hitchens

Fousheezy — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:31:57 -0000

Hahaha, I love that you posted about this. When I first saw you did, I immediately thought you would reprimand Cookulacrates and I for barfing godlessness all over her facebook comment's pants.

I hold similar views about the sudden arrival of angry atheists. Complicit silence in order to not be tortured and murdered by a compassionate religious majority does not mean people weren't disagreeing with religious views. Religious people see atheists as the boy who points out the emperor isn't wearing clothes: it was ok before because everyone was doing it, but now that somebody is pointing, it's super embarrassing to think about the silly premises you've accepted under faith. It's only natural she would take offense.

Re: Bishopgate - a train wreck in the making

Fousheezy — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 11:36:58 -0000

I would say you're perfectly within reason to ask on his wall if his future ex wife knows he's gay. Obviously that was intentionally provocative, but he was soliciting reactions by publicizing his lie on facebook.

Re: Religion Undermines Democracy

Fousheezy — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 01:45:09 -0000

I think the difference in criticism levels from within his own party has everything to do with which party you're from. Republicans tend to all vote together on an issue, they are a party of homogeny. Democrats have all kinds of different people with different ideas on how things should be all grouped together as "Democrats" but- as the Health Care debate alone has shown- they don't vote in lock step along party lines. And there are still plenty of people who support what President Obama is doing, but the dissenting people are talking the loudest so I would say it does seem disproportionately disapproving.

I don't know whether I'd agree the lack of black criticism towards President Obama is due to uncritical support within that community. While a brief consideration would probably lead me to accept that, I pause and wonder whether there are some racially biased assumptions in that proposition.

When talking about white support for Obama, media coverage usually says that the white person in question agrees with President Obama's politics. When talking about black support for Obama, it's all too tempting to dismiss it as "he's black, you're black, of course you support him" in the same way people readily dismissed white people who /didn't/ support Obama as racist (though many of them really are)

Further, Black people only make up 13% of the national population, so- even at 90% approval within the community, that accounts for 11% of the national approval. I would also mention that Blacks have voted around 90% Democrat in every election since Lyndon B. Johnson supported the Civil Rights Act.

I would ask you if you thought it was possible that the reason ~90% of Blacks support Obama is because ~90% of them are Democrats, and their community has a more unified political agenda which matches the policies President Obama has enacted so far? Maybe they agree with his policies, even with critical oversight of his actions.

To answer your initial question, of course I would consider uncritical support of a politician based on some non-political issue like race to be very dangerous to the democratic process. I would not consider uncritical black support to be /as/ dangerous as the union of politics and religion simply because religion has a much more powerful unifying effect. The unity Blacks may feel are based in their community, and their shared experiences growing up. The authority is based in many different people on Earth who can change- despite some who might arrogantly proclaim themselves to be the voice of blackness.

Religious unity is derived from another world as interpreted by a few clerics. They do proclaim to speak for all members of a religion and insist that the members repeat their opinions. The power structure is much more rigid and the power to dictate political positions of a church lies in far fewer hands.

Re: It’s a wonderful campaign. Most of the claims made...

Fousheezy — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:00:29 -0000

Wow Nik, you nearly lost me midway through, but that's when you started connecting your points and I saw where you were coming from. This was an excellent post, though I'm not yet sure whether I fully agree.

I would say that, with your initial point, it's not like the failure of prop 8 would somehow MAKE schools start teaching that marriage is actually 2 people, not a man and a woman. It would only differ if marriage was already being discussed in the classroom, and only if the involved parties were also being discussed. It seems like such an incidental difference, it's demagoguery to tell parents teachers would be forced to explain gay sex to their children if married gays are legally recognized.

Re: http://blog.fousheezy.com/post/295833759

Fousheezy — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 14:44:56 -0000

Yeah I wasn't expecting anything like that. But I thought Spore missed out on some fun by making the cell phase so brief and trivial.

Re: They Call Me Fousheezy - Wes, somebody I know (on Facebook), just entered a...

Fousheezy — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:46:45 -0000

Corey, you obviously didn't read what I wrote because you're responding to a reply I made to somebody else.

Regarding the "personal" message- I think Matt hit the nail on the head: if you wanted that message to be personal, you could have sent it via facebook message to Wes. Or Emailed it to him. Or texted him. Or left him a voicemail. But you instead decided to publicly comment on his status, which all of his and your friends can see- possibly more, depending on your facebook privacy settings. So it was out there, on the internet. You best assume nothing is private. But that point aside, I /did/ do you the courtesy of not naming you in my original post, and blurring your last name in this post's image. I did not post your full name on my blog, nor did I demand that people harass you for your beliefs, as you are harassing me for my views. I don't presume you think yourself to be the only Corey in existence? I know you believe that the thing which created the universe and everything is observing you specifically, but I do you the courtesy of assuming your narcissism stops there. So allowing "Corey" to show in the image did not reveal you nor did it invade /your/ privacy.

It's funny you mentioned consenting adults who are interested in your activity, because christians will not suffer consenting adults who are interested in gay sex to behave the way they wish. Christians will not permit gays to marry. Or adopt children. Or express their affection towards one another in public.

The organization you are defending, espousing, and attempting to promote has done everything in its power to dehumanize the very group of people you're trying to get to join you. I have no respect for such a hypocritical undertaking. And before you start to say that you realized your god really does love gays or some other apologist retrofitting: the bible says it is to be taken literally as absolute truth. It purports itself to be the directly spoken will of your god, and it explicitly condemns homosexuality. There is no reconciling. The christian god hates gay people because the christian god was made up by primitive humans who didn't know any better.

So I take issue with you spreading lies to people who have been lied to enough by society. I resent your attempts to use tortured logic to somehow make the very real hatred be ok for gay people so they will accept such a ludicrous world view.

Atheists on the other hand have no beliefs. We accept facts. We suppose propositions, but only if they are testable. We can't suppose a god or gods or monsters or ghosts, because there is no way of testing for such things. There is no way of proving them true or false, so it is frivolous to postulate such occurrences. Atheists focus on how to explain reality with what is observable in reality. We don't need an entierely unobservable reality to explain the behavior of the universe. So yeah, you've never bashed an Atheist for his or her beliefs because an atheist lacks a belief to bash. If you were to bash an atheist for accepting reality for what it is, you could very easily be classified as delusional and insane.

I expect you to accept reality, but I refuse to take part in your make believe or, in your view, "show respect" by silently watching you to delude and corrupt the reality of others. I showed respect enough when I didn't post my beliefs directly beneath yours and expose you as a fool in front of all your friends.

Re: They Call Me Fousheezy - Wes, somebody I know (on Facebook), just entered a...

Fousheezy — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:40:18 -0000

Um, I don't know even slightly who you are, but you do realize that I have a right to post whatever I wish on my blog. I don't go around sending links to people, insisting they read this; in fact I would encourage quite the opposite.

As far as your allegation of my worthlessness, I'm not sure how you know that since we haven't shared more than 3 sentences of conversation- 2 of which politely pointed out an error on your own self-indulgent blog about how Carrboro is full of terrible hippies, hipsters, and communists. I would like you to note that I didn't troll any of your posts or call you a conservative pile of trash. I just moved on.

Because of our limited correspondence, I assume that you don't know I'm working for a small business in Cary which develops technology and treatments for children with autism or other mental/social disorders. But then again you could very well consider helping the disabled to be a worthless endeavor. As an aside, I haven't been to a campus event since I graduated, with the exception of joining my friends at this year's Fall Fest. I was admittedly drunk at the time, but not to the point of "crawling" around campus.

Now that you're on my personal blog, I would say that, based on your smug tweets about how great conservatism is, and how terrible President Obama is, you worship just as delusionally at the altar of Reagan. It seems you support neocons who would just as soon shove you into traffic as they would shake your gay hand, based on imagined fiscal conservatism? The real truth is that both parties are fiscally liberal and the only difference is on what they spend tax dollars money. Personally I'd support investing US dollars in US infrastructure rather than shipping it overseas with the lives of our bravest.

I do appreciate that two people who belong to such dogmatic groups have simultaneously descended on this post declaring me to be a terrible person for making fun of idiots on my personal part of the internet, all the while failing to see the irony.

Re: They Call Me Fousheezy - Wes, somebody I know (on Facebook), just entered a...

Fousheezy — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:17:01 -0000

Oh hey Corey.

To answer your question, when you make a fool of yourself by supporting a superstition which explicitly engages in destructive behavior towards a group of people to which you belong, I feel the need to comment. When you walk around praising the leader of such a delusional hate group, not-so-subtly trying to spread the cult's influence, I am compelled to step in and voice my opinion.

You accuse me of being immature and hide behind "you're bashing me for my beliefs." I challenge you to open your own eyes and grow up yourself. Your beliefs are absolutely inconsistent with reality and your insistence on denying what is real shows you aren't as ready to face the real world as you think.

I acknowledge that there is no way to know whether a god or gods or beings exist- I don't claim to be omniscient, but I reserve the right to laugh at those who do claim to /know/ that there /is/ a god or governing supernatural being. I would go further to say, while I don't know for sure, there is such an overwhelming mountain of evidence which indicates that such a being isn't there, making a claim to the contrary is beyond idiotic, it's willfully delusional and narcissistic.

"Not only is the god described by my group the right god, but all the other thousands of cults and groups who made similar claims of a supernatural being are wrong. Also this all powerful creator of everything is paying attention to me and cares about what I do." It seems you need to realize the magnitude of existence. The incredible size of the solar system, galaxy, and universe renders your claims about your imagined god loving you totally absurd and deserving of ridicule.

Lastly, your claim that you don't intend to ever force your beliefs on me or others is patently false as indicated by the fact that you invite people to your cult meetings and talk about how great your cult is- or even more evidently- in the fact that you posted on my personal blog. A cult like christianity's primary goal is to constantly indoctrinate new members, and through 2000 years of violent, hate-filled governance, the religion has shown that it does indeed seek to demonize any and everyone who doesn't believe exactly in its tenets.

I encourage you to apply critical thinking when at your future bible study sessions. Really /think/ about what is being represented as truth. Most people only find the bible palatable when it's taken out of context. They don't ever see the massive amounts of the document which advocate rape, incest, torture, slavery, genocide, murder, homophobia, racism, sexism, ethnic cleansing, sexual repression, and moral absolutism. They don't ever read the parts which very explicitly contradict previous "absolute truths"

For all of these reasons, I will very loudly make fun of religious groups and the people who insist on being a part of them.

Re: honestly.

Fousheezy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:11:24 -0000

I agree that not every issue somebody takes with the gay community is not homophobia, and it's fine that you personally aren't flamboyant. My issue is when you blame those who are flamboyant for our entire community's oppression, it's like you're saying "we're all being oppressed because of *you* people. I want equal rights, and I want the straights to just oppress *you* instead of oppressing us all." That is homophobia. That is blaming the people suffering injustice for the injustice they suffer. You are aligning yourself with the opinion that different is bad and shouldn't be considered equal- that is a position of homophobia.

You're blaming the flamers for the fact that your straight friends take on stereotypical views towards gay people? Why aren't you instead blaming your ignorant friends. Instead of telling some gay people not to express who they are lest you be grouped with them, tell your friends not to lump all gay people together. The argument reminds me of the following protest against gay marriage: "I don't want to have to explain to my kids why one of his classmates has two mommies or two daddies" Essentially, censor other peoples' lives so that my life is easier.

It's because gays open their arms to all variations of gayness that we have the straight acting gays, the drag queens, and everything in between. It's not the community's fault that the gays who act normally aren't as "visibly gay" in the community- isn't that the point? Those glitter chuckers aren't marching to take away anybody's right to continue acting "normal", they're marching to demand that our society live up to its promise of freedom and equality for all. I mean, would you ask Cezanne to be any different from his amazingness now? :P

Another blog I follow had a similar reaction http://jesseboy.tumblr.com/...

Re: honestly.

Fousheezy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:58:46 -0000

I'm not surprised that you agree with him because you have the same repressive view towards sexuality. I'm not sure who you mean when you say "the rest of us" because while not all of the gay community is roller blading down the street in nipple tassels and jorts, most of the gay community accepts that straight society's view of sexuality is wrong and narrow-minded. Most of the gay community enjoys and applauds the gays who are super fabulous and courageous enough to be that fabulous in public.

You go on to attack the gay community for not being inviting- and again I'm not sure what you're talking about and how it relates to the poster's internalized homophobia. I think the gay community welcomes everyone, including the straight acting gays or the straights. We include them, but we don't appreciate it when they say "you should act more like us because it's 'normal'" If you're referencing bi-phobia, that'a a different conversation entirely. I'm not saying the gay community is flawless by any means, but at least they have discovered liberation through expression of their sexuality.

Finally, you said I judged the person who posted this, and compared me to a bunch of ignorant pricks. But I didn't judge this person, I rejected that his 'opinion' was an acceptable way to treat other gay people, and outed it for what it was- homophobia. And that's what it is. This person is embarrassed by gayness and wants to keep it all very quiet which is neither productive for the gay rights cause, nor does it ingratiate him to straight people in any way.

I don't understand why some fags think that if they can act just as embarrassed and disgusted by openly gay people's actions as the straight people they so desperately wish to be, that in some way will make straight people give them a high-five and buy them a beer for being one of the few 'ok' gay people. In my mind, that's just like a black person trying to show white people that he or she is well spoken an non-threatening. It's degrading to yourself and robbing self respecting gay people of a real chance at recognition.

Re: They Call Me Fousheezy - Something There - Beauty and the Beast Jeanne...

Fousheezy — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:49:02 -0000

Yesssssssss! If you didn't suggest it, I would have requested it.

Re: They Call Me Fousheezy - Antidepressants! I’m having to use Jonathan’s...

Fousheezy — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:49:41 -0000

You know, so you can take it around with you. Swilling it easily from a paper bag like the classy person that you are!

Re: They Call Me Fousheezy - This is the guy I keep seeing at the gym. Well...

Fousheezy — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:48:20 -0000

I never did. I stopped going to UNC's gym (since I can't anymore) Now I work out alone at my office's gym. I wish there were some porn stars to look at