ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, January 25, 2013

When rabbits rage

I don't know about you, but one of the things I found most illuminating about the inevitable reaction of various angry rabbits to the featuring of the fraudulent reviewer was the strength of their expressed emotions.  I mean, even if I was absolutely everything they claimed me to be: insecure, childish, a baby, bratty, thin-skinned, small, unprofessional, pathetic, out-of-line, and so forth, why would that be so observably upsetting to them?

Why would they go out of their way to declare, with considerable umbrage, that they would never read a book of which they had never heard before and which they never had any intention of reading anyhow? Why would they find it to be "utterly reprehensible" to do what literally dozens of other sites were already doing?  Why did they find me to be "scary" when they presumably don't feel that way about MyAddress or Google Street View?  Why would they feel the urgent need to follow the fraudulent reviewer's example and "warning other to stay away" from my terrifying books? 

Part of the answer can be found inadvertently provided in the comment of Farida Y.  "He deliberately posted the address of a woman as a clear target of contempt."  Remember, we usually give away our values in the process of attacking others.  Because I most typically deride others as weaklings, fools and idiots, I betray the fact that I value strength, wisdom, and intelligence, and aspire to those things.

From their insults, we can see that Rabbit People place particular value on being viewed as sane, grown-up, mature, professional, and in-line.  For example, if you see a blog that describes itself as "thoughtful", you can be sure that it belongs to a rabbit.  This doesn't mean, of course, that they actually are any of those things, it merely means that those things are what they aspire to, and what they erroneously believe everyone else aspires to as well.

Now, the main reason the Rabbit People were offended was that they correctly interpreted my action to be one of contempt.  They know that I do not see them as equals, but as inferiors whose opinions are not to be taken seriously and are useful only for the purpose of amusing me and my readers.  This tends to infuriate those who consider themselves to be thoughtful, grown-up, and responsible because one of their primary objectives is to be taken seriously by the herd, thereby elevating their status within it.

But if the correctly perceived contempt explains the offense, and therefore the nature of the responses, it does not explain their vehemence or the level of emotions that fueled them.  To understand this, you must first understand that the Rabbit mind is fundamentally feminine, and the feminine mind is ruled, first, foremost, and forever, by fear.

This is why, in addition to the previously listed descriptions, I was also described as: angry, scary, frightening, psychopathic, creepy, unstable, and obsessed.  These labels are not meant literally, they are simply code words meant to warn fellow rabbits ELIL AHEAD: BEWARE THE PREDATOR.  In addition to being offended, the rabbits are also afraid on two counts.  First, I have demonstrated that I am immune to their weapons of excoriation and exclusion, which, being herd animals, is something they find inexplicable and frightening.  Second, I have shown that I am willing to step "out-of-line", which means that I am capable of taking actions that they cannot imagine, anticipate, or control.  The combination of these two things is enough to strike absolute terror in the rabbity heart; it quite literally panics them even when, as in the case of the fraudulent reviewer, no one was threatened in any way, shape, or form.

Their antics weren't inspired by the fact that my actions were intrinsically dangerous, as they obviously were not, but rather, from the fact that those actions were outside the boundaries defined by the rabbits as being safe.  Rabbits bolt from big scary noises; they don't stop to reflect upon whether it is a hungry bear with a particular hankering for rabbit or a truck that isn't anywhere near them and isn't even capable of being aware of their existence.  The simple act of stepping outside the lines is, from the rabbity perspective, an inherently dangerous act, because their way of life revolves around the dynamic construction of rules designed to circumscribe the behavior of others.

Jack Amok explained it correctly: "Rabbit/Lefty people count on this, that their opponents will hold themselves to civilized rules of conduct the lefties will themselves aggressively ignore. Like a woman who screams, spits and throws things at a man, confident he wouldn't dare backhand her across the room in response.  The shock when he doesn't conform to expectations is usually dramatic." 

Stickwick added: "For the rabbit people, any behavior that isn't sufficiently supplicating in response to their attempts to shame and cow probably does have the appearance of psychopathy."

And Allyn asked an apt question:
"A question for those that have a better understanding of rabbit behavior.  Do rabbit folk go blind during their rage and lose the ability for reading cognitive recognition?  This question is a direct result of observing today's acts.

Vox claims "For my next trick I will make the rabbits appear and then dance and hop on one foot".

On command the rabbits appear, raging at Vox for being a Nazi, homophobic, poopy head that is not smarter than them. What they seem to miss is they are doing this while dancing and hopping on one foot."
 Yes, that's exactly what they do.  They go blind with rage and fear.  A sufficiently angry rabbit, (which is essentially synonymous with a sufficiently frightened rabbit), is hopelessly irrational and possesses mere fragments of the cognitive abilities it usually has.  They are rendered intellectually tharn.

Let me give you an example from an exchange that followed yesterday's chorus line of hopping, dancing rabbits between an SFWA member and me.  Unfortunately, I can't quote the other individual due to where the exchange took place, but the summary should suffice to illustrate the point.  Being a candidate for the office of president, I was asked to explain my actions related to the fraudulent reviewer, which I did as follows:
"[I]t was part of a larger point I was making about Rabbit People and one of their common tactics. I knew several Whatever readers would attack my books by using the reviews because that's the sort of readership Mr. Scalzi has. I had a similar experience with Richard Dawkins's fans after publishing TIA. There were a number of other fake reviews posted yesterday that I reported in the conventional manner and were immediately removed by Amazon, such as this one: "Vox Day" is not only a bad writer; he's also an angry, racist psychopath. Stay far away from this mediocre book.""
This led to a response from one gentleman who rejoices in sprinkling his missives with lawyerly idioms.  He claimed that because he happened to provide a few of Whatever's 7.8 MILLION PAGEVIEWS in 2012, I had personally insulted him by accusing him of engaging in unprofessional tactics, and furthermore, had attacked the SFWA membership as well.

Now, it shouldn't be terribly difficult for anyone who has graduated from elementary school, much less law school, to realize that an insignificant number of readers are not synonymous with the entire readership.  Still less does the subset necessarily have anything to do with a separate organization, even if that organization happens to have some degree of overlap with the set.  But the rabbit, esq. was so angry and tharn that he manufactured a nonsensical ex post facto justification for his wounded feelings, which of course required me, as a known healer and teacher, to gently explain the errors in his reasoning to him.

Which explanation I provided with such care and compassion that one giant of science fiction was moved to exclaim in open amazement and wonder.

I have to admit, I wasn't particularly sanguine about my electoral prospects before yesterday, but I'm feeling pretty optimistic about them now.  After all, even rabbits like seeing a lawyer get bitch-slapped.

Labels: ,

150 Comments:

Anonymous dh January 25, 2013 8:56 AM  

When is the election?

Anonymous VryeDenker January 25, 2013 9:00 AM  

Do you have any plans of working rabbit-human half-breeds into the next installment of the Arts Of Dark And Light series? They could be the slaves of the Siegskifting.

Anonymous VD January 25, 2013 9:04 AM  

No, you know the approach. No subtexts. But incorporating various principles of human behavior in figuring how the characters are going to behave does help make them stronger and more credible.

Anonymous VryeDenker January 25, 2013 9:06 AM  

Of course. It's not a terribly serious suggestion but it would have been a great inside joke.

Anonymous Lulabelle January 25, 2013 9:09 AM  

Great post. I feel I may be on my way to becoming a rabbit expert. I'm wondering if this subject needs its own tag.

Anonymous Outlaw X January 25, 2013 9:10 AM  

They started the fight, it is your job to finish it as far as I am concerned. No Biting or eye gouging though (unless verbally).

Anonymous VD January 25, 2013 9:12 AM  

That's not a bad idea. Consider it done.

Anonymous Lulabelle January 25, 2013 9:14 AM  

"rabbitology".....thanks, Vox. Coffee on the keyboard.

Anonymous JartStar January 25, 2013 9:20 AM  

of course required me, as a known healer and teacher, to gently explain the errors in his reasoning to him.

I laughed.

Anonymous dh January 25, 2013 9:21 AM  

I have to say that coining the term and using it has you have is the high-mark for creativity in advanced trolling techniques. For some reason the actual animal itself seems to infuriate them more anything.

Anonymous VD January 25, 2013 9:28 AM  

I have to say that coining the term and using it as you have is the high-mark for creativity in advanced trolling techniques. For some reason the actual animal itself seems to infuriate them more anything.

Happy to amuse. But keep in mind there is a larger point here. It is a functioning predictive model and it can be quite helpful in understanding the underlying reasons for what otherwise appears to be irrational anger and fear being exhibited.

Everyone has an amount of rabbit in them. But the more we understand the concept and the way in which the processes work, the more we can surmount them, if we choose to do so. Or, alternatively, the more we can manipulate them in others.

It can be difficult to resist the temptation to make a rabbit hop and dance just for kicks once one learns the trick of it. Fortunately, restraint is a virtue of the K-selected.

Anonymous Outlaw X January 25, 2013 9:34 AM  

Vox just a quick warning. I used to use a wounded rabbit mouth call to call the Coyotes to shoot them. Don't ever fall for the wounded rabbit. Just my thoughts. I think dh is starting it. But I been wrong about a lot of things men, and nearly nothing, nature.

Not to say men is not part of nature, but never knew a rabbit to fake a wound.

Anonymous Poli_Mis January 25, 2013 9:34 AM  

This meme is getting better and better. I dare say this could be great material for another book. Non-fiction this time, and one that roasts tender rabbits on a spit for their predators.

TIA laid waste to apsy tools. A Rabbit Roast would make these 'people' screech in octaves higher than Billary in front of a senatorial committee.

Blogger IM2L844 January 25, 2013 9:35 AM  

Ha! Thanks, Vox. Reading that post gave me a useful chuckle.

It gave me a funny mental image of Whatever's readership in a bunny hop conga line..."hop, hop, hop."

Anonymous DrTorch January 25, 2013 9:37 AM  


It can be difficult to resist the temptation to make a rabbit hop and dance just for kicks once one learns the trick of it. Fortunately, restraint is a virtue of the K-selected.


Really? I thought the restraint was just not to comment on it. I enjoy the ability to invoke action at a distance. Part of it is to see just how precise I can be in predicting the response, both the timing and the content.

Blogger Tiny Tim January 25, 2013 9:37 AM  

Rabbits are nothing but food. Since rabbit people do not have to fear being eaten, does this mean they are completely worthless?

They must have some value. Are they redeemable?

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 9:39 AM  

@Vox Day

They know that I do not see them as equals, but as inferiors whose opinions are not to be taken seriously and are useful only for the purpose of amusing me

Boy, I can't tell you how much irony there is for me in this. Kinda funny when you think about.

This is why, in addition to the previously listed descriptions, I was also described as: angry, scary, frightening, psychopathic, creepy, unstable, and obsessed. These labels are not meant literally, they are simply code words meant to warn fellow rabbits ELIL AHEAD: BEWARE THE PREDATOR.

"Predator" is the right word here. "Stalker" is. And I'm sure you recognize that. You didn't rise to the level of predator in your episode of investigative whining. However, you did come off as one of those weird Internet stalkers. It's similar to how some see your interaction with Scalzi.

As for the fear factor...well, it's somewhat understandable. If a person is willing to track down someone due to a bad review of a book, you can't really be sure it will all end there.

Anonymous Outlaw X January 25, 2013 9:48 AM  

"As for the fear factor...well, it's somewhat understandable. If a person is willing to track down someone due to a bad review of a book, you can't really be sure it will all end there."

Tad

Do you drive a car? I have given away my adress through my HAM call sign at least twice and no one has come for me. I have had three wrecks which one should have killed me and walked away without a scratch. Have you no faith? If the reviewer is scared or you are in fear for her you don't understand.

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 9:49 AM  

I happen to be a rabbit owner (real rabbits, not the human behavioral kind). Rabbits, while absolutely fear driven, are pleasant little creatures when you can provide for their every need and keep them secure. Having a rabbit person for a friend or a spouse is akin to a racing stallion having a little stall goat for a companion animal.

I'm friends with plenty of rabbit folk. It certainly isn't a terribly deep or fraternal bond, more similar to a patriarchal indenture than anything, but it doesn't mean the bond isn't strong, nor that I'm burdened by their company.

Because their responses are so narrow and predictable, they are also amusing.

So yes, although they are quite unlikely to every change their tendencies, I would still say they are redeemable, much in the same way that the old lady was redeemable in the face of the Misfit's threat of violence in "A Good Man is Hard to Find."

“She would of been a good woman," said The Misfit, "if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life.”

Blogger IM2L844 January 25, 2013 9:50 AM  

"As for the fear factor...well, it's somewhat understandable."

Only to another rabbit.

Anonymous Steveo January 25, 2013 9:53 AM  

Yesterday, I hit a rabbit with my Dodge Ram 2500 Diesel.
I had to cross two lanes of traffic to get it.


The hilarity Vox discovered in the forensic analysis of rabbitdom will forever be a bright spot in this period of American life as the future digests this information. Scalzi is on the verge of becoming a complete and total laughing stock FOR ALL TIME as he becomes the nom de lapin, even the quintessential moai of rabbitism. He is literally leaping onto the flaming sword of Vox Day with his every rabbit effort and doing so as a result of measured words yanking emotional marionette strings. And it is SCIENCE!

Anonymous VD January 25, 2013 9:54 AM  

I can't tell you how much irony there is for me in this. Kinda funny when you think about.

Sorry, Tad. Lambdas can't AMOG. Now put on a nice feather boa and join the conga line.

Anonymous Nimrod January 25, 2013 9:54 AM  

I sense a Tad(pole).

Anonymous JartStar January 25, 2013 9:56 AM  

Perhaps the best example of a rabbit group is Atheism+. The fourth and fifth word on atheismplus.com is “safe place”. The FAQ is amusing, passive aggressive, and supports censorship.

Anonymous buzzcut January 25, 2013 10:00 AM  

Salad is what food eats.

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 10:03 AM  

VD
No subtexts.

You are absolutely horrible at this goal. Or, I should say, if an addict is accurate in considering himself sober because the quantity of cocaine he takes each morning weighs less than the light beer he used to pound, then you successfully avoided subtext in ATOB. You did succeed at amping up the plot and plain meaning considerably, and I'm sure that was your driver.

That win, however, provided extremely convenient cover for your frequent trips to the subtext men's room, with a mirror right in hand.

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 10:04 AM  

Adds new meaning to the term "Hopping Mad". Both in the sense of angry and insane.

Yet I hope everyone realizes that the rabbits are also pressing the buttons. When they press the one labeled "RSHD", the target is supposed to slink away in horror or offer up severe penances. When that doesn't happen they think they are dealing with Hannibal Lecter.

They cannot imagine someone who is righteous, but doesn't follow society's rules, doesn't fit in nor want to fit in.

In the recent Gospel readings for Mass, there were encounters with the Pharisees, each time asking "Why don't you and your disciples follow our rules"? Because they aren't the law, and Jesus explains and/or demonstrates in such a way to make them look stupid or foolish. The least foolish leave first (like the eldest with the woman caught in adultery).

Yes, rabbits can be redeemed, but not as rabbits.

Interesting C. S. Lewis used the word "rabbit" in describing the exact same thing:

http://www.merelewis.org/CSL.gitd.1-12.ManOrRabbit.htm

We are to be re-made. All the rabbit in us is to disappear—the worried, conscientious, ethical rabbit as well as the cowardly and sensual rabbit. We shall bleed and squeal as the handfuls of fur come out; and then, surprisingly, we shall find underneath it all a thing we have never yet imagined: a real Man, an ageless god, a son of God, strong, radiant, wise, beautiful, and drenched in joy.

Anonymous Starbuck January 25, 2013 10:06 AM  

You know, I have observed this rabbit behavior in the past. Perhaps I have behaved like that at times. I'd like to think I haven't but I know I have. However, I have not made a lifestyle out of it.

I used to call this herd mentality cattle. This just didn't fit right. Rabbit behavior describes it much better then cow.

VD, how do you define this new word tharn?

I couldn't find a definition for it in a dictionary.

Anonymous Josh January 25, 2013 10:09 AM  

Ron Swanson, on rabbits:

"Ron, would you like some salad?"

"Since I am not a rabbit, no, I do not."

Blogger Tiny Tim January 25, 2013 10:10 AM  

Penned up, new rabbit moms will sometimes eat their offspring at birth.

It is a curious habit....

Blogger Tiny Tim January 25, 2013 10:12 AM  

Penned up, rabbits will spend time urinating and defacating in their food bowls.



Anonymous Azimus January 25, 2013 10:12 AM  

We need a survey monkey/test on "How Rabbity are you?" that we can point folks to. Does one exist?

I am not savvy enough on a computer, nor do I see myself as sufficiently Nate-Josh-VD-like to compose it myself.

Anonymous rho January 25, 2013 10:12 AM  

For some reason I never got the rabbit people/Watership Down connection until this post when it was made expressively clear.

Wheels within wheels.

Anonymous fish January 25, 2013 10:13 AM  

Rabbits, while absolutely fear driven, are pleasant little creatures when you can provide for their every need and keep them secure.

A complete psych profile in a single sentence. Well done sir!

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 10:13 AM  

Starbuck, the terms are from Watership Down (a fantasy based on rabbit cultures, for the unfamiliar).

Elil is the word for dangerous enemy. Tharn is the rabbit word for being petrified with terror.

It is a great word, by the way, because when real rabbits seize up, it is unique compared to human terror. Richard Adams was really great with his rabbity terms.

Anonymous Josh January 25, 2013 10:15 AM  

We need a survey monkey/test on "How Rabbity are you?" that we can point folks to. Does one exist?

All we would have to do would be draw up 3 or 4 questions corresponding to each r/K difference.

Anonymous Wendy January 25, 2013 10:17 AM  

Perhaps if more people were aware of rabbit behavior, both their own and that of others, there wouldn't be so much of "there ought to be a law..." as a response to everything remotely bad and scary.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 January 25, 2013 10:22 AM  

They are more like Geese to me. Geese always have one of their numbers looking out for predators while the others feed. They also will attack anything that looks like it is attacking their babies, such as ducks.

Me, I used to be a rabbit person. But I strayed too far and transformed into a bear.

Anonymous Josh January 25, 2013 10:22 AM  

Wendy, I think lacking self awareness is a key rabbit trait. Or at least a refusal to acknowledge one's own nature. Like women who insist that short hair, advanced degrees, and manjaw make them more attractive to men.

Anonymous Susan January 25, 2013 10:22 AM  

Non PC truth delivered in the straight forward manner of VD is something rabbits can't handle. I am old enough to have lived life before PC started, and it is sad watching the end result of the PC culture.

Mass Rabbit reactions are like watching a zombie movie except with fur and less gore. When I open posts like these now, I have my pellet shield at the ready. Can't be too careful.

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 10:33 AM  

I should suggest everyone should go and read the whole short essay by Lewis, it is well worth the time and unifies many themes on this blog.

http://www.merelewis.org/CSL.gitd.1-12.ManOrRabbit.htm

I also need to extend the "push button" metaphor. Note that is how rabbits keep control. By pushing the buttons on their fellow rabbits. They go berserk when a non-rabbit starts pushing the emotional buttons and they react as predictably as any properly programmed robot. There is hope and danger in that. Someone may figure out how to take over the Rabbit-bot-net. You can see the attempts with what happened in Connecticut, but there are fewer rabbits or they are trying with the wrong buttons, though notice it is all about fear. Sometimes it does get so bad and obvious that even rabbits realize what is going on and rebel. Sometimes not (TSA security theater). Rabbits operate on fear, and they fear Obama, but feared Romney more, so even with a sub-50 approval rating Obama won.

Men do not want to and will not for long live in fear. Rabbits are in perpetual fear, but the apparent safety of the warren is an addiction, worse than crack cocaine. Leaving the warren causes rather bad symptoms of withdrawal, because they must cease and are ceasing to be rabbits, and ceasing to fear. Their choice is to go back to the addiction of being one of the herd, or to be free.

Blogger IM2L844 January 25, 2013 10:37 AM  

because when real rabbits seize up, it is unique compared to human terror.

That reminds me of a great trick my dad taught me for hunting rabbits with a hand gun. When a rabbit is flushed out, if you make a loud, high pitched whistle, they will stop in their tracks and remain perfectly still for about 3-5 seconds while you aim and shoot them. Good times...

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 10:42 AM  

"because when real rabbits seize up, it is unique compared to human terror."

Another amusing commonality... When flushed... rabbits always run in a circle. So you just let them go... and wait for them to circle back around... ***BANG***.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 25, 2013 10:43 AM  

"Interesting C. S. Lewis used the word "rabbit" in describing the exact same thing:

http://www.merelewis.org/CSL.gitd.1-12.ManOrRabbit.htm

We are to be re-made. All the rabbit in us is to disappear—the worried, conscientious, ethical rabbit as well as the cowardly and sensual rabbit. We shall bleed and squeal as the handfuls of fur come out; and then, surprisingly, we shall find underneath it all a thing we have never yet imagined: a real Man, an ageless god, a son of God, strong, radiant, wise, beautiful, and drenched in joy."

Just repeating this just because it is absolutely awesome.

Anonymous The other skeptic January 25, 2013 10:46 AM  

Wouldn't it be great if they all gave up US citizenship

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out!

Anonymous Tom January 25, 2013 10:50 AM  

@Starbuck: Read Watership Down. It'll explain much of the other "rabbit" words Vox uses (eg, "elil").

...

"way of life revolves around the dynamic construction of rules designed to circumscribe the behavior of others."

A more apt description of America today (included too many "conservatives") I cannot imagine...

Anonymous Stickwick January 25, 2013 10:51 AM  

I've learned far more about human behavior from reading this blog than I did in any of the required social "science" courses I took in college.

Anonymous Noah B. January 25, 2013 10:53 AM  

I think there may be a another reason for the fear factor among the rabbit types that has escaped mention thus far, but probably won't come as much of a surprise.

One of the consequences of the rabbits' emphasis on conformance to societal expectations, civility, thoughtfulness, etc. is that rabbits are unwilling to be seen as instigating a confrontation, even if they're justified in doing so. Thus, one rabbit will seldom accuse another rabbit of lying, even when the lie is obvious. Rabbits thereby become accustomed to being able to lie without being challenged, so when their lies are identified in a very public way, it's shocking. Polite people simply don't make such accusations!

Their internal dialogue goes something like this: "So what I said wasn't technically true, but it could have been! What does it matter? Why is this guy being so MEAN?"

To put in another way, they're passive-aggressive little shits.

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 10:59 AM  

Stickwick... we needed you on another thread the other day and you were no where to be found.

Who else are we supposed to ask about the ballistic coefficient of boobs? We were at a total loss.

Anonymous Starbuck January 25, 2013 11:00 AM  

@Tom: Read Watership Down. It'll explain much of the other "rabbit" words Vox uses (eg, "elil").

Yea, I read that book. 35 years ago. About the sametime I read Animal Farm. Hard to recall the little details now.

Anonymous rycamor January 25, 2013 11:03 AM  

Another key behavioral identifier is that rather than seeking to challenge themselves and put their behaviors and beliefs to the test of fire, they seek affirmation (and absolution) for choices they have already made, and they consider the giving of such affirmations to others as one of the highest callings in life. Hence, the Oprah worship.

Anonymous RP-in-TX January 25, 2013 11:04 AM  

That reminds me of a great trick my dad taught me for hunting rabbits with a hand gun. When a rabbit is flushed out, if you make a loud, high pitched whistle, they will stop in their tracks and remain perfectly still for about 3-5 seconds while you aim and shoot them. Good times...

Funny thing, my dad taught me the same trick. He would do the whistle with two fingers to his lips. I couldn't do that as a kid and so used to carry a coaches whistle when rabbit hunting.

Anonymous Rally January 25, 2013 11:06 AM  

Here's a suggestion to anyone who likes to make those demotivaters:

Elmer Fudd, with a Mohawk and an ar-15.

Be vewwy vewwy quiet. I'm hunting for a wabbit!

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 11:07 AM  

Noah B. makes a good point. Predators will fight but also avoid killing - at some point both realize who the victor will be and with only a few exceptions, the loser will back down. Rabbits can barely fight at all, so it is either one very nasty, brutish, and long stalemate or a torturous fight to the death, or both will "lose" when one is hurt physically and the other is upset at causing the harm.

Satan was described as a liar and murderer from the beginning, and liars are in the lowest levels of Hell if you believe Dante's description.

The proper ethical position is to treat lies and any fraud (as the commandment is worded: "Bear False Witness") as far worse than anything they may be covering up. For a lie is a desire to not be forgiven, final impenitence, that the sin was either not a sin or was intentional and desired. Lies come from the great sin of pride. If you are merely greedy you will become a thief or robber, using stealth or violence. It takes something far worse to take both property and trust.

The rabbits don't even trust each other. That is one of the secrets and why the rabbits don't confront lies. Solipsism can be correct if it is rabbit to rabbit - both in telling and accepting lies.

Anonymous Noah B. January 25, 2013 11:08 AM  

@rycamor

That's a good point. They're interesting in group harmony and acceptance, not truth.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 11:19 AM  

@Vox Day

Sorry, Tad. Lambdas can't AMOG. Now put on a nice feather boa and join the conga line.

First, you apparently can't begin to appreciate how the irony builds even now. Second, you've clearly never conga-ed with a feather boa...It's just not safe.

Blogger Log January 25, 2013 11:33 AM  

...and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Anonymous Anonymous January 25, 2013 11:42 AM  

Vox -

This is an excellent post, and your "Rabbit Series" is uncovering a major problem in everyday life. It's giving the answers for irrational behavior I cant figure out

We need more posts on these people

Anonymous Stickwick January 25, 2013 11:49 AM  

Who else are we supposed to ask about the ballistic coefficient of boobs? We were at a total loss.

I probably wouldn't have been much help. When it comes to physics of the female anatomy, I'm more of a disinterested theorist than an avid experimentalist.

Anonymous Herman the German January 25, 2013 11:53 AM  

Stickwick wrote: I've learned far more about human behavior from reading this blog than I did in any of the required social "science" courses I took in college.

---AMEN. Truer words were never spoken, ha ha! I have had the same experience here, Stickwick

Anonymous Josh January 25, 2013 11:54 AM  

When it comes to physics of the female anatomy, I'm more of a disinterested theorist than an avid experimentalist.

There is a cure for that...called alcohol...

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 12:05 PM  

Log
...and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? - St. Paul

Certainly you aren't suggesting St. Paul was in danger of hell fire for declaring the obvious, are you, Log?

Calling fools fools is good Christian form. Your inability to present relevant scripture is pretty funny, though. Keep it coming. Will you next admonish Vox for coming into contact with rabbit people, even though they chew the cud despite not possessing an undivided hoof?

Anonymous cheddarman January 25, 2013 12:06 PM  

speaking of rabbits, I am reminded of this parody classic -

sincerely

cheddarman



In an abandoned warehouse with no lights. Just shadows, and soon no rabbits. The purpose of the event is to pass the torch from one generation of heavy metal to the next. And there lie... in his black leather hunting outfit with a shotgun guitar with spikes coming out of it, Ozzy Fudd the Rabbit Slayer!

In the dead of night
A shimmewing wight
Gweem of a bwade
And the devil was paid
When the axe comes down
A chewing sound
Steel against the head
Another wabbit's dead
I'm a wabbit swayer
A guitar pwayer
With a nasty habbit
Kill the wabbit!
(Hah hah hah)
AhhhaahooOhhh

I'm a mean mistweater
A wabbit feaster
And I pwedict
A bwoody Easter
A scuwwowing shadow
And the shadow wants to stab it
In the night of echoes
Kill the wabbit!

KILL THE WABBIT! (x8)

Ohhhh...
And there won't be any more wabbits awound!
No more Wodger Wabbit
No more Peter Wabbit
And no more Pwayboy Bunny Wabbits!
Ah ha ha ha ha!
Be vewy vewy careful. Oooh...
Cwazy wabbits... (Sonic SBL)

Anonymous allyn71 January 25, 2013 12:13 PM  

"First, you apparently can't begin to appreciate how the irony builds even now. Second, you've clearly never conga-ed with a feather boa...It's just not safe."


Yes Tad, those long pointy ears, ever growing incisors, and those oversize rear feet set you apart from all the other rabbits. You are the special snowflake white non-rabbit rabbit.

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 12:14 PM  

"There is a cure for that...called alcohol..."

HA!!

Anonymous Andre January 25, 2013 12:21 PM  

@Starbuck

From Urban Dictionary:

Describes the act of a person or animal being frozen in terror, e.g. a deer caught in the headlights.

Perhaps originally found in Richard Adams's novel 'Watership Down,' the term was also adopted by Stephen King for use in his novel 'The Stand.'

Michael stood tharn while the grizzly bear bore down on him.

Anonymous Unending Improvement January 25, 2013 12:31 PM  

I think Tad has a crush on our esteemed Cruelty Artist.

It's kept him going through all the abuse we heap on him.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 12:37 PM  

@Unending

It's kept him going through all the abuse we heap on him.

The thing is, you just aren't very good at the heaping.

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 12:44 PM  

"The thing is, you just aren't very good at the heaping."

Mate.. jamming a red hot poker up someone's ass is abuse... even if the poor soul with the flaming rectum insists its enjoyable.

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 12:46 PM  

http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/3604597-if-the-status-quo-for-certain-authors-were-the-same-across-other-industr


Rabbits gonna Rabbit.

Anonymous Scintan January 25, 2013 12:48 PM  

Perhaps if more people were aware of rabbit behavior, both their own and that of others, there wouldn't be so much of "there ought to be a law..." as a response to everything remotely bad and scary.

This behavior has long been known and discussed. Ben Franklin certainly recognized those who exhibited such behavior as a problem.

Anonymous bob k. mando January 25, 2013 12:58 PM  

what happens when rabbit people DO decide to do something ... because someone else ( whom they perceive to be ) in the herd did it?

well, here's a fine example from Canuckistan:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/10/04/mb-burned-bridge-carlee-block-vita-manitoba.html

http://www.cbc.ca/player/Shows/ID/2286167402/

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 1:01 PM  

Taddit the Special Non-Rabbit Rabbit. He like a woof cuz he wear shirt with three woofs and moon! My mon Taddit don't shiv!

Blogger Doom January 25, 2013 1:18 PM  

Finally. Okay, these are often the "fine folk" in any local who think they have some sort of run on moral or ethical authority in any group, though it could be in a Church (unfortunately that is often too true), a town (though that is often undone as the sheriff will not back them, not even often city cops will back them, but he can be dealt with in other ways if he actually thinks he is Barny), and in other places. In general they are easily undone by merely telling them, while looking them right in the eye, to piss off. They do come in mating pairs, and thus male and female, and often appear as whole warrens. But they, both sexes, and in groups, respond equally well to being told to piss off, usually without a bit of anger, none needed, none really deserved. It's rather a boring affair.

I haven't dealt with these types online, so I wasn't quite getting the equation of the (is it debunked then) biology theory and 'those type of people'. I must say, they are much... well, I wouldn't say braver... how about... they are much more persistent online than in real life. Then again, I look like, and probably could, crush their skulls with a mean glance. They aren't stupid, mostly, and simply disappear out of my life after that. The most recent one to do so was a college philosophy professor at a men's organization I attend, which he 'no longer sees fit to attend, himself'. Saw him the other day on the town. He's still pissy about it all, a year and a half later. Hehe

Now this is FUN!

Anonymous Gx1080 January 25, 2013 1:26 PM  

Watching adults going on a frothing frenzy because someone dares to think different than them is....pretty sad, actually.

"If you go against the herd, THE HERD WILL CRUSH YOU!!!!".

That's one of the reasons that I don't bother to post in forums, the herd mentality is waaaay too strong on them.

Anonymous 43rd Virginia Calalry January 25, 2013 1:30 PM  

I don't comment here as often as I once did because of the sheer volume of comments however I was moved to comment on this post because you really caused the light bulb to come on. It had never occurred to me that anyone would WANT to stay "in-line". That just blows my mind but I see that you are correct.

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 1:33 PM  

bob k. mando, that was the funniest article I've read in a while.

Smoke rolling from a collapsed burning bridge is, on a normal planet, considered a bad sign. These drivers are banding together so that bridges aren't ever allowed to collapse and burn again without proper signage.

Oh, Canada.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 1:43 PM  

For your entertainment...

How rabbit people view themselves.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 25, 2013 1:51 PM  

Of course. It's not a terribly serious suggestion but it would have been a great inside joke.

He already had a dwarf and a goblin slaughtering rabbits from pig-back for the amusement of an arena crowd.


Are they redeemable?

It's not a question of redeeming them, it's a question of building a society where they can find comfort and productivity without destroying said society through overreaction to fear and the desire for conformity. Part of that is managing the world of illusions they live in that Noah B. described above. I think it's important to have wolves who can live among the rabbits without eating them. The wolves keep the rabbits from building an immense bubble of insular lies that will pop with devastating effects.

It does indeed take all kinds to make a world, or perhaps thats just the building material we've been given. Our failing has been in each of us retreating to the sanctuaries of our own kind, complaining that everybody else isn't just like us instead of figuring out how to fit all the pieces together into a functional society. We can throw a few pieces out, but we can't throw evertyhing that isn't like us out - that won't leave enough to work with.

Besides, what lunatic wants to live in a world full of nothing but Alphas and Sigmas?

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 1:55 PM  

Besides, what lunatic wants to live in a world full of nothing but Alphas and Sigmas?

Co-eds?

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 2:04 PM  

Oh, hey Tad, do you feel up to answering the question I asked you a couple days ago?

I asked why you opposed Political Statement Registration: requiring all people who want to exercise their free-speech rights to give their names, addresses, and intended statements in advance and sit out a "cool-down" waiting period.

I mean, after all, political speech when used recklessly can be very dangerous. So, why not?

Anonymous JartStar January 25, 2013 2:22 PM  

I knew the other day when Vox agitated the rabbits they would retaliate by giving fraudulent reviews on Amazon. What’s interesting about this in retrospect is that I never questioned that they would act without personal honor and lie without remorse.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 2:23 PM  

@Nate


Mate.. jamming a red hot poker up someone's ass is abuse... even if the poor soul with the flaming rectum insists its enjoyable.


Yeah, Ok. But the problem is the poker is neither hot nor red and it's not approaching the ass, despite what people think.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 2:25 PM  

@Signe

Oh, hey Tad, do you feel up to answering the question I asked you a couple days ago?

Not particularly. I'm a bit lazy about the whole thing today.

Anonymous Lone wolf January 25, 2013 2:34 PM  

"Rabbits bolt from big scary noises; they don't stop to reflect upon whether it is a hungry bear with a particular hankering for rabbit or a truck that isn't anywhere near them and isn't even capable of being aware of their existence."

They like big grassy lawns like teletubbies do.

"After all, even rabbits like seeing a lawyer get bitch-slapped."

"But the rabbit, esq. was so angry and tharn that he manufactured a nonsensical ex post facto justification for his wounded feelings.."

That's because practically all lawyers are rabbit people themselves that feminist mind/hampster wheel comes in handy in BSing the courts.

Anonymous Ridip January 25, 2013 2:36 PM  

I have pet rabbits that live indoors. There are a couple behaviors that are interesting and fit the analogy.

Many rabbits are "cage protective". They get all freaked out when you "invade" there cage and start attacking. This is really funny and hard to take seriously because they're so darn cute, can't do much damage and as soon as you start stroking them they completely melt and forget why they were mad.

When a rabbit disapproves of something or wants it removed from their presence they will crap on it (just a single poop) or drag it into their litter box. If you don't notice and take care of it soon enough they'll piss all over it.

Rabbits will fall all over themselves and practically fight to see who can be the most submissive. In their perspective the one who submits the most is top bun.

Some rabbits are a bit wall-eyed and can't see what's right in front of their nose, even a treat. When you try to point it out to them they are likely to bite. If you put your hand in their blind spot.

Rabbits like to be petted and stroked. They will lay their head on the ground to indicate this. We see it as submission in their body language it means they have deigned to let you touch their royal head.

By the way the reason the whistling trick works when hunting is because rabbits squeal when they are in great pain or mortal fear, usually when an attacker has just latched onto them. The other rabbits will freeze to avoid being seen. But if one thumps a warning they run like hell from the indicated danger. And as Nate said in their panic they frequently lose their minds and run in circles.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 2:46 PM  

Not particularly. I'm a bit lazy about the whole thing today.

Didn't want to call a Rule 2 on you, but...yeah. Rule 2, Tad.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 3:13 PM  

@signe

I asked why you opposed Political Statement Registration: requiring all people who want to exercise their free-speech rights to give their names, addresses, and intended statements in advance and sit out a "cool-down" waiting period.

Because there is no potential for physical danger associated with political statements.

Anonymous Josh January 25, 2013 3:18 PM  

Tad,

So you oppose hate speech laws?

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 3:20 PM  

"Because there is no potential for physical danger associated with political statements."

There isn't?

really?

are you sure you don't want to think about that a little more?

Blogger JDC January 25, 2013 3:29 PM  

As I continue to grasp this rabbit concept, and consider my own tendencies towards this behavior, and see the revulsion people are expressing towards Vox...a word keeps popping up in my head. Liminality (I recently researched the word for a paper I was writing).

This rabbit talk, for me, has opened a new threshold in my thinking - initiated by a liminal character. For a liminal being (in this case Vox), invisibility or the "not fully perceived" seems to be at play. In some cases the liminal being cannot be recognized as a known corporeal identity. It simply cannot be perceived with the given, or accepted norms.

Are the rabbits mobilizing out of rage and fear? Is this Leporid behavior the result of a loss of cognitive ability? Or is it a threshold that they cannot cross, because they can not perceive a world in which a liminal being gets in their face and is allowed to calmly declare, I don't care what you think - this is reality. Now get back to your cage, because I really don't care what you think.

(Written from my cage in mid-MI).



Anonymous Jack Amok January 25, 2013 3:40 PM  

Co-eds?

No silly girl. Even co-eds want their Beta orbiters around to move furninture, buy them drinks, and say "there, there" when they need to cry over the lasted player who dumped them.

But it is just like a woman to forget all about the Betas she relies on when someone mentions Alpha or Sigma. The Invisible Men.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 25, 2013 3:45 PM  

are you sure you don't want to think about that a little more?

Now see, this is what I was getting at a few posts back. If thinking about it a little more was likely to do them any good, they probably wouldn't have made such a stupid mistake in the first place.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 3:49 PM  

No silly girl. Even co-eds want their Beta orbiters around to move furninture, buy them drinks, and say "there, there" when they need to cry over the lasted player who dumped them.

But it is just like a woman to forget all about the Betas she relies on when someone mentions Alpha or Sigma. The Invisible Men.


Well:

- to move furninture: You can hire Alpha or Sigma guys who make a living doing that.
- buy them drinks: Really, have you never heard of the Alphas who brag about girls buying THEM drinks and such?
- say "there, there" when they need to cry over the lasted player who dumped them: That's called "girlfriends" (whether they're male or female). Mr. Beta just happens to be convenient at the moment; she doesn't even really see him as male.

But it is just like a woman to forget all about the Betas she relies on when someone mentions Alpha or Sigma. The Invisible Men.

Yeah, sorry that I made a cynical, one-word joke about how unjust and short-sighted college girls can be. I should have been more sensitive to your feelings.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 3:51 PM  

Because there is no potential for physical danger associated with political statements.

Wars have never been started based on political statements?

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 3:56 PM  

...Or riots, or the Holocaust; should have added that.

Furthermore, why does it have to be a standard of "physical danger", Tad? Do you consider direct physical injury to be the only thing that could justify curtailing a right?

What if it were the loss of rights--for instance, political speech that results in the end of women's suffrage, or a return to slavery, or the internment of gays?

Anonymous bob k. mando January 25, 2013 3:58 PM  

Tad January 25, 2013 3:13 PM
Because there is no potential for physical danger associated with political statements.




you don't get more blitheringly stupid every day. you just more fully reveal yourself to be such. Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Pol Pot ( to name but a few ) would all like a word with you.

there's even LAWS about this, and they far predate the existence of the United States Constitution or the mass murderers of the 20th century:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH0Et56Hxt4

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 25, 2013 4:03 PM  

Yeah, sorry that I made a cynical, one-word joke about how unjust and short-sighted college girls can be. I should have been more sensitive to your feelings.

Now, now, Signe. No need to make him cry.

Anonymous Daniel January 25, 2013 4:05 PM  

internment of gays?

Now you are just going to get him excited, Signe. He's had to subsist on Roger Corman movies until now.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 4:10 PM  

Now you are just going to get him excited, Signe.

I think he's been running at at least half-mast since he started posting here. It's all the manly men paying attention to him, y'know.

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 4:21 PM  

There is an old B horror movie "Night of the Lepus". Rabbits become (bio/rads/something) the size of elephants. But are still rabbits. Sounds like modern day society.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 25, 2013 4:23 PM  

I am ever so deeply wounded that you failed to grasp my humor.

Anonymous Myrddin Emrys January 25, 2013 4:38 PM  

Now, now, Signe. No need to make him cry.

My humble apologies for intruding on someone else's sacred ritual, but...

...at the moment.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 4:42 PM  

I am ever so deeply wounded that you failed to grasp my humor.

Want a bandaid, Penelope?

Put 'em up, put 'em up...

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 25, 2013 4:47 PM  

I should never have promised that she could be the Goddess of Badinage...

Anonymous Gen. Kong January 25, 2013 4:48 PM  

This has been most hilarious. Hats off to VD for providing us with some splendid entertainment!

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 4:56 PM  

@Signe

Because there is no potential for physical danger associated with political statements.

Wars have never been started based on political statements?


No. Wars have been startee based on political decisions, followed by shooting.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 5:00 PM  

@signe

for instance, political speech that results in the end of women's suffrage, or a return to slavery, or the internment of gays?

You opening your mouth will result in words. The ending of suffrage or the bondage of humans or interning of anyone. Only actual action will do that.

Anonymous Agent Mongoloid January 25, 2013 5:00 PM  

"Because there is no potential for physical danger associated with political statements."

I can typing. I cans regulation. I can...


>long l = TextUtils.encodeAsBase37Integer: --||'||-@---||\}}--*||--_%}{}{|__}{|-|/\||>||-||\|||\--||-\\\-\\\|^@--|| --|<

[Ok, look; I know you're new to agitprop department, and we all on the floor were a little jealous at first that they recruited some seeming greenhorn punk straight out of the humanities dept at Penn State - given how we thought we only had operatives in both their board of directors and football program; they never told us about any sophops, let alone you. But we all realized that you were and are a valuable and talented asset to the project, small as our division is. I mean, who else could have target audience arguing with a flaming Pharisaic homo (this is the talk at the water cooler, by the way; very nice touch) about minutiae of constitutional intent and the lack of any op at SH, all the while leaving them obvious red flags all over the place? (My personal favorite was Mark Twain as atheist not forgotten.) And yeah, I know we're not supposed to breach cover and offer advice to one another on enemy territory, but I've gotta tell you right now: Don't outrun the schedule. There will be time enough to get target audience to do what we want - our Nordic ACAB project proves that. Just don't overstep your boundaries or cover to prove something to brass back in Fairfax. Trust me, you don't want to deal with anyone on the fed tit who doesn't operate out of a business rental like we do; we at least have some veneer of workaday respectability and plausible deniability, 9-to-5 at an office space with a parking lot above ground, etc - not like those watch-tower Templars in their federal castles...

So with that:
Fortitudine vincimus, and with any luck I'll see you at a Grove get together in the next year. Don't forget your paddle this time.]

>logout: --||'||-@---||\}}--*||--_%}<FIX tag 35=5


...typing. I CAN TYPING. I make the BEESCUITS. Down't - trow us - away.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 5:04 PM  

No. Wars have been startee based on political decisions, followed by shooting...

You opening your mouth will result in words. The ending of suffrage or the bondage of humans or interning of anyone. Only actual action will do that.


So yelling fire in a crowded theater is only words, and it's the actual action of everyone deciding to panic that's the proximate cause of the damage?

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 5:07 PM  

@signe

So yelling fire in a crowded theater is only words, and it's the actual action of everyone deciding to panic that's the proximate cause of the damage?

That's not a political statement. That's.....what do they call that? "Disturbing the peace"? I'm not sure. I am sure that it's not classified as a political statement.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 5:10 PM  

That's not a political statement. That's.....what do they call that? "Disturbing the peace"? I'm not sure. I am sure that it's not classified as a political statement.

Okay, so words don't cause people to take certain actions if they're political words?

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 5:13 PM  

@Signe

Okay, so words don't cause people to take certain actions if they're political words?

Political statements can inspire action. They can't cause it. And it's rare that political statements inspire violent action. Afterall, we just went through a 2.5 year Presidential campaign that was nothing but political statements. Where's the violence?

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 5:19 PM  

And it's rare that political statements inspire violent action.

Aren't all actions enforced by the government, using guns, "inspired" by political statements?

Afterall, we just went through a 2.5 year Presidential campaign that was nothing but political statements. Where's the violence?

Violent flash mobs. Look it up.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 5:24 PM  

@Signe

Honestly, I think we are done here. You don't seem to have your A Game today. You feeling poorly or just distracted?

Anonymous Rantor January 25, 2013 5:25 PM  

This was almost a perfect thread... and then Tad came along.

I echo stickwick, although r/K selection theory has been around for quite sometime, I can not recall the depth of understanding shown here, from my university psychology and sociology classes in the 1980s. Well done, defined, demonstrated and discussed.

Intellectually inadequate (too short for this ride) Tad still thinks your just jealous of Scalzi. Whatever.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 5:28 PM  

@Rantor

This was almost a perfect thread... and then Tad came along.

Oh dear, oh no, oh my, oh goodness....We can't be having a contrary opinion.....

Face it, Rantor, you just don't have a response of any merit. Go to the corner.

Anonymous bob k. mando January 25, 2013 5:32 PM  

Tad January 25, 2013 5:24 PM
@Signe
Honestly, I think we are done here. You don't seem to have your A Game today. You feeling poorly or just distracted?



let's see, so he declares an unwarranted victory. and now he's edging towards quitting the field and slipping out the back door.

keep the faith, Signe. he still hasn't threatened not to sleep with you. there yet remains hope!



Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 5:33 PM  

Honestly, I think we are done here.

I'm sorry you don't feel like explaining why political speech really and truly, honest for gosh sakes doesn't lead up to many more horribly violent acts than private gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.

You don't seem to have your A Game today.

I know. Not getting away with stupid blather is not fun for you. You prefer the games that involve you talking and everyone nodding in agreement.

You feeling poorly or just distracted?

Now that you mention it, there's this guy hanging over my shoulder, eating popcorn right in my ear and laughing every time you try to escape me. And he's not sharing. It's horrible.

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 25, 2013 5:39 PM  

And he's not sharing. It's horrible.

Now, why should I wish to stop you typing, Signe? I have not laughed so since the time I replaced half of the United States Senate with ferrets and nobody noticed until they proved too ethical.

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 5:49 PM  

Tos: Wouldn't it be great if they all gave up US citizenship
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out!


Except I've pointed out that our immigration policy involves importing rabbits that the existing sterile rabbits are failing to produce.

(Nor have I thought about Tina Turner - I don't think she is a rabbit since she correctly noted "reincarnation" seems to have everyone being a bigwig in the past life when statistically they should have been slaves).

The more interesting question is if Bunnifornia and Bunnillinois will require the rest of us to bail them out, as the non-rabbits are leaving the warren.

The evil of democracy is apex predators have the same number of votes as the herbivores. Or worse, the plants.

Anonymous Anonymous Conservative January 25, 2013 5:50 PM  

Having read this in light of the mindset of a rabbit, it is amazingly masterful.

I was literally speechless and awed, throughout it.

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 6:00 PM  

Signe: are you familiar with the expression "beta tester"?

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 6:05 PM  

@Tad: "Shouting 'Fire!' in a theater" is an "incitement".

An incitement is an appeal to base emotion. Pornography can be considered an incitement to fornication or adultery. The distinction is whether the appeal is to reason via argument or to emotion or something even lower by fear, hate, lust, or something similar.

There ought to be free speech on any political statement, but the political statements have an annoying tendency to turn into something enforced by jackbooted thugs who shoot you if you disagree or dissent.

Tolerance of Addled Dummies, or "TAD".

Anonymous Ridip January 25, 2013 6:22 PM  

Honestly, I think we are done here.

Tad drops a single bunny pootie on Signe's head and looks plightfully at Loki to have her removed from his presence.

Stupid rabbit thinks he's won and all he's done is kicked the crap out of his litter box.

Bad rabbit!

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 6:25 PM  

Signe: are you familiar with the expression "beta tester"?

Like someone who puts software through its paces, looking for bugs?

Blogger tz January 25, 2013 6:34 PM  

@signe: yes. Now consider a female who tries a male whose status is between an alpha and gamma...

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 6:37 PM  

@signe: yes. Now consider a female who tries a male whose status is between an alpha and gamma...

Okay...

Anonymous Ridip January 25, 2013 6:40 PM  

tz, we've already determined Tad is λ.

Anonymous Anonymous January 25, 2013 6:43 PM  

is it safe to say that scalzi and the minions there are a bunch of pussies?

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 6:49 PM  

" I have not laughed so since the time I replaced half of the United States Senate with ferrets and nobody noticed until they proved too ethical."

Hey.. we're used to seeing weasels running amok on that hill...

Blogger Nate January 25, 2013 6:51 PM  

"keep the faith, Signe. he still hasn't threatened not to sleep with you. there yet remains hope!"

Given that there is reason to believe that Signe has a uterus... one can safely assume that Tad isn't particularly interested.

He prefers the sausage.

Anonymous Signe January 25, 2013 6:53 PM  

Well, it's been fun, but I'm off to parts uncivilized. I should be back Monday or so.

Hope I don't get eaten by a crocodile.

Anonymous bob k. mando January 25, 2013 7:20 PM  

Nate January 25, 2013 6:51 PM
Given that there is reason to believe that Signe has a uterus... one can safely assume that Tad isn't particularly interested.

He prefers the sausage.




that's, i say, that's the joke son.

Tad is still making pretensions that he's not an idiot, Lambda or Rabbit when it's already clear and apparent that he's all three.

for God's sake, the boy can't even parse the first sentence of the Constitution.

corollary to the above joke is the added fiction that Signe would want him to sleep with her.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 8:01 PM  

@Signe


I'm sorry you don't feel like explaining why political speech really and truly, honest for gosh sakes doesn't lead up to many more horribly violent acts than private gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.


I'll bite, only because I don't want you to walk away from the conversation without a clear schooling

When someone fires of a political statement at the person in front of them, there is no physical harm resulting. If someone fires of a pistol at the person in front of them the whole point is to do physical harm. In fact, there is a high likelihood the harm will be lethal. There just isn't an equivalency between the two things.

Now I realize that your point was to note that if I support registration of fire arms, I ought to support the registration of speech. But, as it should be clear by now, the two things are not the same. Nor is the impact of using the two.

Now, if you want to continue to insist that political statements and fire arms are the same thing, knock yourself out. But realize, the argument is without merit.

There. Now, having been schooled, you can be on your way knowing you got something out of this stupid attempt to try to best me.

Anonymous Anonymous January 25, 2013 9:10 PM  

Conan Cimmerian

Tad
I'll bite, only because I don't want you to walk away from the conversation without a clear schooling


Tad says as just a few posts before Signe signs out...that way he can claim her silence as his "schooling"

When someone fires of a political statement at the person in front of them, there is no physical harm resulting.

Yes, Lenin's political speech never harmed anyone.

Yes, Stalin's political speech never harmed anyone.

Yes, Hitler's political speech never harmed anyone.

Yes, Mao's political speech never harmed anyone.

Yes, Pol Pot's political speech never harmed anyone.

Once again Tad is shown to be completely and totally wrong.
But that can't be!

Tad,the lying sack of crap trying to take advantage after Signe has left the field, is a moron.

Anonymous Myrddin Emrys January 25, 2013 9:34 PM  

Eh, Tad can't prove that physically harming someone is a Bad Thing on any other grounds than it makes him and the people he likes feel bad.

I think that physically harming people is occasionally a very good thing. With me on this are nearly every human who has ever lived anywhere and anywhen. But the dead aren't allowed a say anymore, which is very oppressive of live folks like Tad. Tad the corpsist.

Anonymous Phil Mann January 25, 2013 9:48 PM  

Actually, Tad is right, but not for the reasons he thinks.

There is a difference between words and bullets and the politicians know it. Some forms of expression carry far more weight than others.

That is precisely why the Second Amendment frightens and concerns them far more than the First.

Mao understood this as well.

Anonymous scoobius dubious January 25, 2013 11:07 PM  

"Now I realize that your point was to note that if I support registration of fire arms, I ought to support the registration of speech. But, as it should be clear by now, the two things are not the same."

In American political theory, the two things ARE the same: the physical objects and their cause/effect relations may not be identical, nevertheless for political purposes (which is what we are talking about, not whether words weigh the same as guns) they are EXACTLY the same: they are both God-given rights, protected by the Constitution.

If I tell you on primary authority, meaning an authority which cannot be trumped, that you are entitled to own both a trebuchet and a newspaper, and then two weeks later some rat-faced weasel with a badge and an Obama sticker on his Prius comes along and says to you, "Surrender your newspaper! Free speech is now doubleplusungood! Thus does King Bammy decree by executive order!" (not that any American newspapers any longer contain what I'd consider free speech), you are within your rights to deny him and appeal to primary authority. You see where this is going?

You wish simply to privilege and enshrine the things which you happen to prefer, and then use magicky priest-hood powers to make the Bad Things go away, by appeal to non-primary authority, which you dress up in drag to make it look primary.

If you genuinely believe that gun rights are not in fact every bit as protected as free speech rights (in fact, examining the language, they are more so; they are not more God-given, but they do in fact enjoy broader protection, look at the language), then in my view you have a moral obligation to leave the country, because you do not accept its basic premises, but wish to have premises of your own, which you hope in time to snooker others into in order to serve your own ends, and not the common weal. You have rejected the common American proposition every bit as much as I would be rejecting it if I said Hey, you know, maybe we ought to reconsider the whole slavery thing, after all them free nigras really ain't working out too well, as statistics show; and after all we used to have a more relevant solution to that problem. Rights? Eh, they're fungible. Some are "relevant" when we agree with them, others, not so much.

I could easily diagnose the root problem here, but I'm trying to remain civil.

Anonymous Tad January 25, 2013 11:30 PM  

@Scoobious


In American political theory, the two things ARE the same: the physical objects and their cause/effect relations may not be identical, nevertheless for political purposes (which is what we are talking about, not whether words weigh the same as guns) they are EXACTLY the same: they are both God-given rights, protected by the Constitution.


Yes, yes yes. Speech and arms are both in the bill of rights. Yes, they are both rights that precede the Constitution.

However, neither right is unlimited. Both may be regulated in one way or another without the right being infringed. And because the substance of these rights are entirely different, it might follow that the limits that may be placed on the rights might also be substantially different. It doesn't follow that that because we limit speech by outlawing libel, that there ought to be an equivalent libel-like limit placed on the right to bear arms. Furthermore, it does not follow that because the right to bear arms can legitimately be regulated by instituting registration, we ought to register speech——as Signe suggested was the obvious conclusion of my support for gun regulation.

How can I put this simpler.....? Oh. Signe doesn't understand what s/he is trying to talk about.

Anonymous Contemplationist January 26, 2013 1:33 AM  

This is terribly amusing of course. But I can't help but nitpick on this r/K selection model as applied to leftists. Consider the basic criteria - reproduction, it's well known that leftist fertility is lower than conservative fertility. Also, non-Asian minorities who have demonstrably lower IQs on average, have higher fertility, while they also use leftist rhetorical tactics. So, we need to narrowly define who exactly goes by 'rabbit people.' It certainly can't encompass anyone who is leftist (or even most)

Blogger Log January 26, 2013 4:22 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Log January 26, 2013 4:26 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Log January 26, 2013 4:31 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Log January 26, 2013 4:34 AM  

Daniel,

Christ gave the general principle. Paul, moved upon by the Spirit, was a specific exception. Likewise, God has said Thou Shalt Not Kill, but at other times has commanded his followers to destroy entire peoples, including the children. Unless God commands otherwise - and Vox has publicly stated he holds to the divine command theory - one adheres to the general principle.

Anonymous jm January 26, 2013 6:27 AM  

It would appear that he who would verse himself in the ways of rabbitology must first read Watership Down to acquire an understanding of certain terms. Not a bad science, as they go.

Blogger Markku January 26, 2013 7:24 AM  

Consider the basic criteria - reproduction, it's well known that leftist fertility is lower than conservative fertility.

Animals in captivity behave differently than animals in the wild. For rabbit people, the impulse to hump anything that moves is still there, but chemicals in their feed affect their actual fertility.

Anonymous Anonymous Conservative January 26, 2013 11:08 AM  

@Contemplationist

“Consider the basic criteria - reproduction, it's well known that leftist fertility is lower than conservative fertility.”

We are talking about evolution imbuing behavioral urges. r's tend to have high mating urges, more partners, and less desire to rear children. This produces a strategy involving frequently single parenting many offspring to minimal levels of fitness. In humans, Birth Control is the lowest form of rearing investment, so it eliminates the actual conception and rearing, but the urges are still there. Conservatives, being K-selected, are the opposite.

Now, check the bottom chart at this site : http://neuropolitics.org/defaultdec07.asp

An exact match.


“Also, non-Asian minorities who have demonstrably lower IQs on average, have higher fertility, while they also use leftist rhetorical tactics.”

IQ is not so closely aligned with r/K. Some think IQ in r's may have been an attempt to specialize, and create niches which would protect them from direct competition (see Woodley's reviews on IQ). Meanwhile K's saw IQ favored to better compete, making it a zero-sum game, with the primary difference in Specialist Intelligence (exploiting a niche to avoid competition – high in Libs) vs General Intelligence (wise-to-the-world IQ for banging heads, high in Conservatives). Fertility is relative. Is it a single mom with ten kids, because she can't stop having unprotected sex with strangers, or is it five kids, because the mother and father love raising kids together?

“It certainly can't encompass anyone who is leftist”

There are five r-traits, Docility/competition aversion, promiscuity, single parenting, earlier exposure of offspring to sex, and low loyalty to in-group. All of Leftism emerges from individuals wanting to use intellect to advance those urges in society. By being left, leftists express an intellectualized r-strategy, and align with a group which has, as its fundamental tenet, advancing the r-strategy in society.

It is why Vox's rabbit-person thing works so well at making lefties mad, and making Conservatives and Libertarians laugh. They are rabbit-people.

Anonymous FrankNorman January 26, 2013 3:06 PM  

Now what do we call the K-strategy folks? Wolf people? (Based on some of the pictures linked here)
I could go with that.

Arrr-ROOOOOO!

Anonymous Desiderius January 26, 2013 7:21 PM  

"Now what do we call the K-strategy folks? Wolf people?"

Here's hoping we're tortoise people.

The race is worth winning.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts