vBCms Comments
Welcome To Hunting Country
General Hunting Forums
Archery & Bowhunting
Shooting Sports
Manufacturers' Corner
Firearms
Classifieds
Not Hunting / General Chit Chat
1.) Swamp Fox - 07/08/2014
I'll have more to say about anti-hunters and the women they hate on the internet later....
Hunting and tranquilizing pictures deleted by FB dweebs...
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/06/facebook-deletes-kendall-jones-cheerleader-hunt-photos_n_5556736.html[/url]
No way to treat a lady...
[url]http://rackemupblog.com/2013/12/01/cyber-bullies-praying-on-women-who-hunt/[/url]
Beware the news Facebook feeds you...
[url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2014/06/28/facebook-manipulated-user-news-feeds-to-create-emotional-contagion/[/url]
Hunting and tranquilizing pictures deleted by FB dweebs...
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/06/facebook-deletes-kendall-jones-cheerleader-hunt-photos_n_5556736.html[/url]
No way to treat a lady...
[url]http://rackemupblog.com/2013/12/01/cyber-bullies-praying-on-women-who-hunt/[/url]
Beware the news Facebook feeds you...
[url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2014/06/28/facebook-manipulated-user-news-feeds-to-create-emotional-contagion/[/url]
2.) bluecat - 07/08/2014
I saw this in the news recently.
I wish the news would have spent more time on the positives that hunting these animals provide.
I can understand why people would instantly make a snap judgement about the pictures without getting all the facts. What I don't comprehend is the threats that are far worse than the actual act itself.
I wish the news would have spent more time on the positives that hunting these animals provide.
I can understand why people would instantly make a snap judgement about the pictures without getting all the facts. What I don't comprehend is the threats that are far worse than the actual act itself.
3.) Bob Peck - 07/08/2014
We humans need controversy just as much as the oxygen in our lungs. If real world controversy doesn't exist we'll fabricate it just to have something to complain and argue about. If there were no controversy we'd all get along, respect each other and live in a Utopia which only exists in heaven and even that's controversial.
The evolution of the anti-hunter can easily be traced back to the fact that we're now several generations removed from our agrarian roots and getting farther and farther away. To meet demand, the small farmer gets pushed out while the corporate farmer rolls in. Even the modern day vegan cannot comprehend that in order to sustain their lifestyle farmland must be created by destroying animal habitat. To the vegan, farmland just "is". To the anti hunter killing in the food chain is done in "humane", sterile and controlled environments. There's no need for the barbarity of hunting and doing the deed oneself. It's done for us so why bother? To the anti-hunter they can only see "killing". They don't, can't, won't see the preparation, the woodsmanship, the ethics or the satisfaction of connecting the dots which yes, does include killing.
I see nothing new, creative or outrageous about a teenager posting trophy photos or tranquilizer shots. I see nothing interesting or evil about the data gathering, privacy invading monster called Facebook. Together they are not more or less controversial and let's face facts there is no such thing as privacy anymore. That died a digital death long ago.
I do see anti-hunters continuing to spend us into the ground at a rate of 10 to 1 while we bicker amongst each other about who has the right to be in the woods and at what time and with what weapon.
The evolution of the anti-hunter can easily be traced back to the fact that we're now several generations removed from our agrarian roots and getting farther and farther away. To meet demand, the small farmer gets pushed out while the corporate farmer rolls in. Even the modern day vegan cannot comprehend that in order to sustain their lifestyle farmland must be created by destroying animal habitat. To the vegan, farmland just "is". To the anti hunter killing in the food chain is done in "humane", sterile and controlled environments. There's no need for the barbarity of hunting and doing the deed oneself. It's done for us so why bother? To the anti-hunter they can only see "killing". They don't, can't, won't see the preparation, the woodsmanship, the ethics or the satisfaction of connecting the dots which yes, does include killing.
I see nothing new, creative or outrageous about a teenager posting trophy photos or tranquilizer shots. I see nothing interesting or evil about the data gathering, privacy invading monster called Facebook. Together they are not more or less controversial and let's face facts there is no such thing as privacy anymore. That died a digital death long ago.
I do see anti-hunters continuing to spend us into the ground at a rate of 10 to 1 while we bicker amongst each other about who has the right to be in the woods and at what time and with what weapon.
4.) bluecat - 07/08/2014
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;21642]
Even the modern day vegan cannot comprehend that in order to sustain their lifestyle farmland must be created by destroying animal habitat. To the vegan, farmland just "is". To the anti hunter killing in the food chain is done in "humane", sterile and controlled environments. There's no need for the barbarity of hunting and doing the deed oneself. It's done for us so why bother? To the anti-hunter they can only see "killing". They don't, can't, won't see the preparation, the woodsmanship, the ethics or the satisfaction of connecting the dots which yes, does include killing.
[/QUOTE]
Well stated.
Even the modern day vegan cannot comprehend that in order to sustain their lifestyle farmland must be created by destroying animal habitat. To the vegan, farmland just "is". To the anti hunter killing in the food chain is done in "humane", sterile and controlled environments. There's no need for the barbarity of hunting and doing the deed oneself. It's done for us so why bother? To the anti-hunter they can only see "killing". They don't, can't, won't see the preparation, the woodsmanship, the ethics or the satisfaction of connecting the dots which yes, does include killing.
[/QUOTE]
Well stated.
5.) Jag - 07/08/2014
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;21642]
I do see anti-hunters continuing to spend us into the ground at a rate of 10 to 1 while we bicker amongst each other about who has the right to be in the woods and at what time and with what weapon.[/QUOTE]
Yes and they're often quite adept at utilizing social media and shock propaganda to full effect. One kid with Paint can create a meme that will sear an image into people's minds. Take a look at someone like Food Babe on Facebook, someone with no nutritional background and little care about the facts, but has a massive following large enough that Subway made a public apology. The hunting industry really hasn't come up with an answer to people like that and the time is running out for them to.
I do see anti-hunters continuing to spend us into the ground at a rate of 10 to 1 while we bicker amongst each other about who has the right to be in the woods and at what time and with what weapon.[/QUOTE]
Yes and they're often quite adept at utilizing social media and shock propaganda to full effect. One kid with Paint can create a meme that will sear an image into people's minds. Take a look at someone like Food Babe on Facebook, someone with no nutritional background and little care about the facts, but has a massive following large enough that Subway made a public apology. The hunting industry really hasn't come up with an answer to people like that and the time is running out for them to.
6.) Swamp Fox - 07/08/2014
My theory is that women hunters, whether high-visibility or on social media, get bitten with more and nastier venom from the antis than guys do...
The next question is why...
I have some ideas on that, too.
Discuss quietly among yourselves...
The next question is why...
I have some ideas on that, too.
Discuss quietly among yourselves...
7.) bluecat - 07/09/2014
I'd be interested to hear what you come up with Swampy.
I'm gonna guess that because woman are typically viewed as nurturers, the disparity between a nurturer holding a dead animal is just too much to bear.
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing. When a woman does that, it really messes with an anti's psyche, forcing them to unwillingly take a moment and question their belief system.
Do I get a parting gift at least? A year's worth of Rice A Roni?
I'm gonna guess that because woman are typically viewed as nurturers, the disparity between a nurturer holding a dead animal is just too much to bear.
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing. When a woman does that, it really messes with an anti's psyche, forcing them to unwillingly take a moment and question their belief system.
Do I get a parting gift at least? A year's worth of Rice A Roni?
8.) Ventilator - 07/09/2014
its hard being a savage, but alas....someone must do it. :hb:
9.) DParker - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=bluecat;21648]I'd be interested to hear what you come up with Swampy.
I'm gonna guess that because woman are typically viewed as nurturers, the disparity between a nurturer holding a dead animal is just too much to bear.
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing. When a woman does that, it really messes with an anti's psyche, forcing them to unwillingly take a moment and question their belief system.
Do I get a parting gift at least? A year's worth of Rice A Roni?[/QUOTE]
I think you're on the right track.
I'm gonna guess that because woman are typically viewed as nurturers, the disparity between a nurturer holding a dead animal is just too much to bear.
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing. When a woman does that, it really messes with an anti's psyche, forcing them to unwillingly take a moment and question their belief system.
Do I get a parting gift at least? A year's worth of Rice A Roni?[/QUOTE]
I think you're on the right track.
10.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=bluecat;21648]I'd be interested to hear what you come up with Swampy.
I'm gonna guess that because woman are typically viewed as nurturers, the disparity between a nurturer holding a dead animal is just too much to bear.
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing. When a woman does that, it really messes with an anti's psyche, forcing them to unwillingly take a moment and question their belief system.
Do I get a parting gift at least? A year's worth of Rice A Roni?[/QUOTE]
I couldn't have said it better myself. You also get a case of Cheesy Poofs, [I]The Big Fat Book of Puns [/I] (revised edition) and the HuntingCountry Board Game, so you can play at home when no one is on line.
I have only anecdotal evidence for this :wink but part of what unhinges the antis about women hunters is, I think, the idea that visible women hunters are new and unexpected and therefore pretty scary, and the fact that they are a sign of growth or at least health in the hunting ranks. Certain segments of the hunting population are growing, and in general our ranks are holding steady despite the general narrative we're often told. This is bad news for the anti story line that hunting is doomed like the dinosaurs, so these new hunters get the full force of the fury.
It also must be especially upsetting to antis to see creatures like themselves (women) on the other side:
[I]Men are much more likely to support hunting than are women, even though a majority of both genders support hunting: a 2006 study by Responsive Management showed that while 84% of men approve of hunting, only 72% of women approve of hunting.
[/I] ---Responsive Management Research [url]http://www.responsivemanagement.com/hunting.php[/url]
( I can't find info I've come across in the past on the breakdown of the sexes among anti hunters; If anyone can give me the numbers and cite a source, I'd appreciate it.)
Going on the theory that the majority or at least a near-even split of antis are women (until other evidence arrives) and clearly evident in the on-line attacks, there's some girl-on-girl action going on in some of these conflicts with women hunters. Anybody want to float the theory that there's no recipe for special fireworks there? Beyond that, it's much easier to attack a woman and keep hounding her than it is a man, or at least a man who is strongly pro-hunting, and I expect women antis feel especially entitled to tear into women hunters.
Again, only anecdotal evidence here, but I follow some of this stuff and it's clear to me that the women hunters get a different brand of vitriol than the guys do.
I'm gonna guess that because woman are typically viewed as nurturers, the disparity between a nurturer holding a dead animal is just too much to bear.
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing. When a woman does that, it really messes with an anti's psyche, forcing them to unwillingly take a moment and question their belief system.
Do I get a parting gift at least? A year's worth of Rice A Roni?[/QUOTE]
I couldn't have said it better myself. You also get a case of Cheesy Poofs, [I]The Big Fat Book of Puns [/I] (revised edition) and the HuntingCountry Board Game, so you can play at home when no one is on line.
I have only anecdotal evidence for this :wink but part of what unhinges the antis about women hunters is, I think, the idea that visible women hunters are new and unexpected and therefore pretty scary, and the fact that they are a sign of growth or at least health in the hunting ranks. Certain segments of the hunting population are growing, and in general our ranks are holding steady despite the general narrative we're often told. This is bad news for the anti story line that hunting is doomed like the dinosaurs, so these new hunters get the full force of the fury.
It also must be especially upsetting to antis to see creatures like themselves (women) on the other side:
[I]Men are much more likely to support hunting than are women, even though a majority of both genders support hunting: a 2006 study by Responsive Management showed that while 84% of men approve of hunting, only 72% of women approve of hunting.
[/I] ---Responsive Management Research [url]http://www.responsivemanagement.com/hunting.php[/url]
( I can't find info I've come across in the past on the breakdown of the sexes among anti hunters; If anyone can give me the numbers and cite a source, I'd appreciate it.)
Going on the theory that the majority or at least a near-even split of antis are women (until other evidence arrives) and clearly evident in the on-line attacks, there's some girl-on-girl action going on in some of these conflicts with women hunters. Anybody want to float the theory that there's no recipe for special fireworks there? Beyond that, it's much easier to attack a woman and keep hounding her than it is a man, or at least a man who is strongly pro-hunting, and I expect women antis feel especially entitled to tear into women hunters.
Again, only anecdotal evidence here, but I follow some of this stuff and it's clear to me that the women hunters get a different brand of vitriol than the guys do.
11.) bluecat - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21654]I couldn't have said it better myself. You also get a case of Cheesy Poofs, [I]The Big Fat Book of Puns [/I] (revised edition) and the HuntingCountry Board Game, so you can play at home when no one is on line.
[/QUOTE]
Blind hog and acorns and all that.
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21654] Beyond that, it's much easier to attack a woman and keep hounding her than it is a man, or at least a man who is strongly pro-hunting, and I expect women antis feel especially entitled to tear into women hunters.
[/QUOTE]
I forgot about that one.
[/QUOTE]
Blind hog and acorns and all that.
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21654] Beyond that, it's much easier to attack a woman and keep hounding her than it is a man, or at least a man who is strongly pro-hunting, and I expect women antis feel especially entitled to tear into women hunters.
[/QUOTE]
I forgot about that one.
12.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=bluecat;21648]...
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing...
[/QUOTE]
I especially enjoyed this phrasing, LOL....Not to take any glory away from your well-made point about women hunters messing with the antis' psyches...:tu:
When a man holds a dead animal there is the understanding that he is a man and therefore a stupid savage only interested in sex and killing...
[/QUOTE]
I especially enjoyed this phrasing, LOL....Not to take any glory away from your well-made point about women hunters messing with the antis' psyches...:tu:
13.) bluecat - 07/09/2014
I want the revised edition of Hunting Country "The Game" where at random intervals, Alex just starts banning people. That is a hoot.
14.) Bob Peck - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21646]My theory is that women hunters, whether high-visibility or on social media, get bitten with more and nastier venom from the antis than guys do... The next question is why... [/QUOTE]
[FONT=Century Gothic]
[B]Tsun Tzu's "Art of War"[/B][/FONT]
Keep your friends close. Keep your enemies closer.
Ingrid Newkirk is the current President of PETA and someone I've met twice. The first time was spontaneous as I was sitting next to her on a plane. Ironically I was heading to an ATA Show. I don't recall where she was heading. The other encounter was a more formal meeting in NYC after I delivered a presentation on the commercial meat industry to an anti-hunting group who btw, served chicken parmesan for lunch. She was an audience member. I found Ms. Newkirk to be highly intelligent, rational, convicted and willing to listen intently to an opposing viewpoint (mine). She studied me. I studied her.
Neither of us managed to nudge the other off their firmly held convictions but she said something to me relating to this topic I found relevant:
[I]"Women are the real decision makers in the family whether men want to admit it or not. In this country (referring to the USA) we are clearly a maternal society. We naturally ascribe a higher value to women than we do towards men. Our species evolution from the hunter/gatherers means women have never had a role in hunting then or now. Women gather up and create consensus. That's why they're so valuable to us and why we both (referring to me) are in a race to bring them into our camps."[/I]
Put another way, women who are actively involved in hunting or promoting the hunting lifestyle get shouted down more fervently than men because of their alleged wider scope of influence.
[FONT=Century Gothic]
[B]Tsun Tzu's "Art of War"[/B][/FONT]
Keep your friends close. Keep your enemies closer.
Ingrid Newkirk is the current President of PETA and someone I've met twice. The first time was spontaneous as I was sitting next to her on a plane. Ironically I was heading to an ATA Show. I don't recall where she was heading. The other encounter was a more formal meeting in NYC after I delivered a presentation on the commercial meat industry to an anti-hunting group who btw, served chicken parmesan for lunch. She was an audience member. I found Ms. Newkirk to be highly intelligent, rational, convicted and willing to listen intently to an opposing viewpoint (mine). She studied me. I studied her.
Neither of us managed to nudge the other off their firmly held convictions but she said something to me relating to this topic I found relevant:
[I]"Women are the real decision makers in the family whether men want to admit it or not. In this country (referring to the USA) we are clearly a maternal society. We naturally ascribe a higher value to women than we do towards men. Our species evolution from the hunter/gatherers means women have never had a role in hunting then or now. Women gather up and create consensus. That's why they're so valuable to us and why we both (referring to me) are in a race to bring them into our camps."[/I]
Put another way, women who are actively involved in hunting or promoting the hunting lifestyle get shouted down more fervently than men because of their alleged wider scope of influence.
15.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
Interesting.
I wonder why rationality hasn't trickled down from the top, then, over there at PETA.
I wonder why rationality hasn't trickled down from the top, then, over there at PETA.
16.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=bluecat;21660]I want the revised edition of Hunting Country "The Game" where at random intervals, Alex just starts banning people. That is a hoot.[/QUOTE]
We're out of those right now. Hoping to build up inventory while membership grows...We're putting pressure on our suppliers, but it's a difficult situation. People have been hording their participation. It has nothing to do with the government buying up an unjustifiable number of posts in an attempt to do an end-run around the Bill of Rights.
Would you accept the version where Luv2 bans people? It's quite entertaining, and has less of an effect on actual membership...
We're out of those right now. Hoping to build up inventory while membership grows...We're putting pressure on our suppliers, but it's a difficult situation. People have been hording their participation. It has nothing to do with the government buying up an unjustifiable number of posts in an attempt to do an end-run around the Bill of Rights.
Would you accept the version where Luv2 bans people? It's quite entertaining, and has less of an effect on actual membership...
17.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
And while we're on the subject...
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;21662]
....Neither of us managed to nudge the other off their firmly held convictions but she said something to me relating to this topic I found relevant:
[I][I]"...Our species evolution from the hunter/gatherers means women have never had a role in hunting then or now..."[/I]
[/I]
[/QUOTE]
Don't know why she felt she had to go there, since it adds nothing to her point, but it's certainly further evidence that facts aren't that important to antis.
You don't have to have a PhD in anthropology to know Newkirk's statement is nonsense.
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;21662]
....Neither of us managed to nudge the other off their firmly held convictions but she said something to me relating to this topic I found relevant:
[I][I]"...Our species evolution from the hunter/gatherers means women have never had a role in hunting then or now..."[/I]
[/I]
[/QUOTE]
Don't know why she felt she had to go there, since it adds nothing to her point, but it's certainly further evidence that facts aren't that important to antis.
You don't have to have a PhD in anthropology to know Newkirk's statement is nonsense.
18.) Bob Peck - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21664]Interesting. I wonder why rationality hasn't trickled down from the top, then, over there at PETA.[/QUOTE]
I suspect "shock and awe", outrage and controversy is sexier than rational conversation and consequently picked up by more media outlets.
The anti's truly understand the value of Tsun Tzu's words about keeping the enemy closer. They are well organized, well funded and an adversary I respect immensely.
I suspect "shock and awe", outrage and controversy is sexier than rational conversation and consequently picked up by more media outlets.
The anti's truly understand the value of Tsun Tzu's words about keeping the enemy closer. They are well organized, well funded and an adversary I respect immensely.
19.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;21667]I suspect "shock and awe", outrage and controversy is sexier than rational conversation...[/QUOTE]
It must be very stressful to be a rational person and run an organization which is basically a three-ring circus.
Can't be good for your chi...
It must be very stressful to be a rational person and run an organization which is basically a three-ring circus.
Can't be good for your chi...
20.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
Meanwhile, on the Facebook front, they say they didn't cave to anti pressure to remove hunting photos...They just didn't approve of them.
[url]http://www.mtv.com/news/1863000/kendall-jones-facebook-hunting-photos-pulled/[/url]
[I]Why did Facebook pull down photos from the page of Texas cheerleader and big game hunter Kendall Jones? It had nothing to do with public outcry, the social network said — the 19-year-old was violating the site’s terms of service.
Facebook told Mashable that the photos broke a rule about “graphic images shared for sadistic effect or to celebrate or glorify violence.”
“We remove reported content that promotes poaching of endangered species, the sale of animals for organized fight or content that includes extreme acts of animal abuse,” a spokesman told Mashable.
[/I]
[url]http://www.mtv.com/news/1863000/kendall-jones-facebook-hunting-photos-pulled/[/url]
[I]Why did Facebook pull down photos from the page of Texas cheerleader and big game hunter Kendall Jones? It had nothing to do with public outcry, the social network said — the 19-year-old was violating the site’s terms of service.
Facebook told Mashable that the photos broke a rule about “graphic images shared for sadistic effect or to celebrate or glorify violence.”
“We remove reported content that promotes poaching of endangered species, the sale of animals for organized fight or content that includes extreme acts of animal abuse,” a spokesman told Mashable.
[/I]
21.) bluecat - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21665]We're out of those right now. Hoping to build up inventory while membership grows...We're putting pressure on our suppliers, but it's a difficult situation. People have been hording their participation. It has nothing to do with the government buying up an unjustifiable number of posts in an attempt to do an end-run around the Bill of Rights.
Would you accept the version where Luv2 bans people? It's quite entertaining, and has less of an effect on actual membership...[/QUOTE]
If it builds morale then I want the Luv2 version. If you fall out of a tree stand and whine about it you go back 10 paces and lose a turn. If you post pictures of hot nurses during recovery then you can actually jump to the top of the leaderboard. If you upset the little guy by quoting the Drury Brothers Dream Season Series then you can add 2" to your rack and ban anyone of your choice for a day.
Would you accept the version where Luv2 bans people? It's quite entertaining, and has less of an effect on actual membership...[/QUOTE]
If it builds morale then I want the Luv2 version. If you fall out of a tree stand and whine about it you go back 10 paces and lose a turn. If you post pictures of hot nurses during recovery then you can actually jump to the top of the leaderboard. If you upset the little guy by quoting the Drury Brothers Dream Season Series then you can add 2" to your rack and ban anyone of your choice for a day.
22.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
LOL... I like it.
The hot nurse jump-ahead is an excellent move, but remember there's only one card for that so people can't use their Obamacare unless they're really desperate and/or lucky...Too much strain on the system, otherwise.
Come to think of it, Billy owes us some hot nurse pictures, too. I'm more interested in Texas nurses than any from Pa., anyway...for some reason. :-)
The hot nurse jump-ahead is an excellent move, but remember there's only one card for that so people can't use their Obamacare unless they're really desperate and/or lucky...Too much strain on the system, otherwise.
Come to think of it, Billy owes us some hot nurse pictures, too. I'm more interested in Texas nurses than any from Pa., anyway...for some reason. :-)
23.) Bob Peck - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21671]Meanwhile, on the Facebook front, they say they didn't cave to anti pressure to remove hunting photos...They just didn't approve of them.[/QUOTE]
Really? Then what's this on the upper right? [url]https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Anti-Hunting-Movement/183127278403521[/url]
It's in the top 5 returns on Google when you type in "anti hunters".
FB is such a damn joke.
Really? Then what's this on the upper right? [url]https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Anti-Hunting-Movement/183127278403521[/url]
It's in the top 5 returns on Google when you type in "anti hunters".
FB is such a damn joke.
24.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
Facebook says it didn't cave...Some anti-hunters claim it made Facebook cave...
(Is that the point of your link? Maybe something is not jumping out at me.)
Two mutually exclusive claims from two groups not to be taken at their word.
(Is that the point of your link? Maybe something is not jumping out at me.)
Two mutually exclusive claims from two groups not to be taken at their word.
25.) Bob Peck - 07/09/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21676]Facebook says it didn't cave...Some anti-hunters claim it made Facebook cave...
(Is that the point of your link? Maybe something is not jumping out at me.)[/QUOTE]
Sorry. The point I was making is that in social media when something goes viral you can remove it from an individual posters FB page citing a policy but that doesn't stop anti's from utilizing the vitriol on their pages. An endless cycle I tell ya. :-)
(Is that the point of your link? Maybe something is not jumping out at me.)[/QUOTE]
Sorry. The point I was making is that in social media when something goes viral you can remove it from an individual posters FB page citing a policy but that doesn't stop anti's from utilizing the vitriol on their pages. An endless cycle I tell ya. :-)
26.) Swamp Fox - 07/09/2014
Ah...Got you.
By the way, I saw at least four separate threads cheering or even advocating harm to hunters (up to and including murder) over there. Not three knuckleheads yelling "Me, too!" at a fourth. Nope. Four separate threads about four separate targets they wished dead or maimed.
Nice folks, that animal rights crowd.
By the way, I saw at least four separate threads cheering or even advocating harm to hunters (up to and including murder) over there. Not three knuckleheads yelling "Me, too!" at a fourth. Nope. Four separate threads about four separate targets they wished dead or maimed.
Nice folks, that animal rights crowd.
27.) Swamp Fox - 07/10/2014
[B][B][I]Facebook: Yeah, we removed Kendall Jones’ hunting pics, but feel free to visit the ‘Kill Kendall Jones’ page....[/I][/B][/B]
[url]http://twitchy.com/2014/07/09/facebook-yeah-we-removed-kendall-jones-hunting-pics-but-feel-free-to-visit-the-kill-kendall-jones-page/[/url]
[url]http://twitchy.com/2014/07/09/facebook-yeah-we-removed-kendall-jones-hunting-pics-but-feel-free-to-visit-the-kill-kendall-jones-page/[/url]
28.) Swamp Fox - 07/13/2014
[I][B]Political ‘creep’ offers $100K for nude pictures of Kendall Jones, as Belgian beauty Axelle Despiegelaere is exposed as a huntress
[/I]
[/B]
[I]And in the backlash against both, one wannabe politician has taken it even further by placing a sick bounty on Jones’ head.
Mike Dickinson, a self-described liberal Democrat in the state of Virginia, is offering to pay $100,000 for nude photos of the teen.
Asked to justify the bounty, Dickinson described Jones’ enjoyment of hunting as “obscene.”
He told US publication The Blaze he thought it was OK to publicly shame Jones because “she deserves to be shamed.”
[B]“I think anything that stops these people from killing these animals is legal,” he said. [/B]
[/I]
[url]http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/political-creep-offers-100k-for-nude-pictures-of-kendall-jones-as-belgian-beauty-axelle-despiegelaere-is-exposed-as-a-huntress/story-fneszs56-1226985643617[/url]
No official word from Debbie Wasserman Shultz or President Obama on where this genius stands in the "War on Women"...
[/I]
[/B]
[I]And in the backlash against both, one wannabe politician has taken it even further by placing a sick bounty on Jones’ head.
Mike Dickinson, a self-described liberal Democrat in the state of Virginia, is offering to pay $100,000 for nude photos of the teen.
Asked to justify the bounty, Dickinson described Jones’ enjoyment of hunting as “obscene.”
He told US publication The Blaze he thought it was OK to publicly shame Jones because “she deserves to be shamed.”
[B]“I think anything that stops these people from killing these animals is legal,” he said. [/B]
[/I]
[url]http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/political-creep-offers-100k-for-nude-pictures-of-kendall-jones-as-belgian-beauty-axelle-despiegelaere-is-exposed-as-a-huntress/story-fneszs56-1226985643617[/url]
No official word from Debbie Wasserman Shultz or President Obama on where this genius stands in the "War on Women"...
29.) bluecat - 07/14/2014
That is sad.
Here is another idea as to why woman are vilified so much. There might be a bit of jealousy at play. How could someone who is against hunting be jealous of a woman with game? Notoriety possibly. Even though they are against hunting, they are jealous of the attention brought to her. After all they are sitting in their birkenstocks with wool socks eating hummus and reading "Everthing bad that happened is because of George Bush and capitalism" and resting up for the next hacky sack tournament.
Here is another idea as to why woman are vilified so much. There might be a bit of jealousy at play. How could someone who is against hunting be jealous of a woman with game? Notoriety possibly. Even though they are against hunting, they are jealous of the attention brought to her. After all they are sitting in their birkenstocks with wool socks eating hummus and reading "Everthing bad that happened is because of George Bush and capitalism" and resting up for the next hacky sack tournament.
30.) Swamp Fox - 07/14/2014
LOL...
What would the honey shots from the crowd look like at a hacky-sack tournament? Any chance they'd even be close to a world-cup soccer match? I'm afraid I couldn't get past the dreadlocks and braided nose hair...and if Samsung ever comes up with Smell-o-Vision, I'm out of there...
If some anti is jealous and wants to get noticed, he or she would have to do better than the very predictable comments I've read. It's like sand in your shorts...No one grain is more or less irritating than another, LOL.
I tend to think it's more natural stupidity and the urge to be reflexively offended. There must be a powerful endorphin rush that kicks in for these people, or something. Let's just assume it's natural chemicals for now... Not that it excuses the mental illness, LOL.
Social media just gives them a place to congregate and wrap themselves in do-goodism. Most of these people don't know the first thing about what they're screeching over. A cheetah, huh? Endangered species, huh? Dead, huh? And---my favorite--Murder, huh?
Unfortunately, the media seem to have gotten on the bandwagon with the nutjobs. I've seen few if any commentators take them or Facebook to task for going full-on hysterical over hunting pictures, or even just the idea of African hunting. The media I've seen has bought into the idea that there's something wrong with the pictures or that the anger at the hunter is understandable and even justified.
I can almost dismiss the crazies---almost-- but the sheeple are of great concern.
What would the honey shots from the crowd look like at a hacky-sack tournament? Any chance they'd even be close to a world-cup soccer match? I'm afraid I couldn't get past the dreadlocks and braided nose hair...and if Samsung ever comes up with Smell-o-Vision, I'm out of there...
If some anti is jealous and wants to get noticed, he or she would have to do better than the very predictable comments I've read. It's like sand in your shorts...No one grain is more or less irritating than another, LOL.
I tend to think it's more natural stupidity and the urge to be reflexively offended. There must be a powerful endorphin rush that kicks in for these people, or something. Let's just assume it's natural chemicals for now... Not that it excuses the mental illness, LOL.
Social media just gives them a place to congregate and wrap themselves in do-goodism. Most of these people don't know the first thing about what they're screeching over. A cheetah, huh? Endangered species, huh? Dead, huh? And---my favorite--Murder, huh?
Unfortunately, the media seem to have gotten on the bandwagon with the nutjobs. I've seen few if any commentators take them or Facebook to task for going full-on hysterical over hunting pictures, or even just the idea of African hunting. The media I've seen has bought into the idea that there's something wrong with the pictures or that the anger at the hunter is understandable and even justified.
I can almost dismiss the crazies---almost-- but the sheeple are of great concern.
31.) bluecat - 07/14/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;21846]LOL...
What would the honey shots from the crowd look like at a hacky-sack tournament? Any chance they'd even be close to a world-cup soccer match? I'm afraid I couldn't get past the dreadlocks and braided nose hair...and if Samsung ever comes up with Smell-o-Vision, I'm out of there...
If some anti is jealous and wants to get noticed, he or she would have to do better than the very predictable comments I've read. It's like sand in your shorts...No one grain is more or less irritating than another, LOL.
I tend to think it's more natural stupidity and the urge to be reflexively offended. There must be a powerful endorphin rush that kicks in for these people, or something. Let's just assume it's natural chemicals for now... Not that it excuses the mental illness, LOL.
Social media just gives them a place to congregate and wrap themselves in do-goodism. Most of these people don't know the first thing about what they're screeching over. A cheetah, huh? Endangered species, huh? Dead, huh? And---my favorite--Murder, huh?
Unfortunately, the media seems to have gotten on the bandwagon with the nutjobs. I've seen few if any commentators take them or Facebook to task for going full-on hysterical over hunting pictures, or even just the idea of African hunting. The media I've seen has bought into the idea that there's something wrong with the pictures or that the anger at the hunter is understandable and even justified.
I can almost dismiss the crazies---almost-- but the sheeple are of great concern.[/QUOTE]
Well stated.
"I tend to think it's more natural stupidity and the urge to be reflexively offended."
"Social media just gives them a place to congregate and wrap themselves in do-goodism."
Those are priceless Swampy.
What would the honey shots from the crowd look like at a hacky-sack tournament? Any chance they'd even be close to a world-cup soccer match? I'm afraid I couldn't get past the dreadlocks and braided nose hair...and if Samsung ever comes up with Smell-o-Vision, I'm out of there...
If some anti is jealous and wants to get noticed, he or she would have to do better than the very predictable comments I've read. It's like sand in your shorts...No one grain is more or less irritating than another, LOL.
I tend to think it's more natural stupidity and the urge to be reflexively offended. There must be a powerful endorphin rush that kicks in for these people, or something. Let's just assume it's natural chemicals for now... Not that it excuses the mental illness, LOL.
Social media just gives them a place to congregate and wrap themselves in do-goodism. Most of these people don't know the first thing about what they're screeching over. A cheetah, huh? Endangered species, huh? Dead, huh? And---my favorite--Murder, huh?
Unfortunately, the media seems to have gotten on the bandwagon with the nutjobs. I've seen few if any commentators take them or Facebook to task for going full-on hysterical over hunting pictures, or even just the idea of African hunting. The media I've seen has bought into the idea that there's something wrong with the pictures or that the anger at the hunter is understandable and even justified.
I can almost dismiss the crazies---almost-- but the sheeple are of great concern.[/QUOTE]
Well stated.
"I tend to think it's more natural stupidity and the urge to be reflexively offended."
"Social media just gives them a place to congregate and wrap themselves in do-goodism."
Those are priceless Swampy.
32.) Swamp Fox - 07/14/2014
Blind skwirl, and all that...:wink
33.) DParker - 07/14/2014
For me it's not even the ill-informed stupidity so much as the blatant hypocrisy by FB and the other media.
34.) bluecat - 07/14/2014
:tu:
35.) Swamp Fox - 07/18/2014
By special request from Luv2, [B]who you will recognize [/B] :wink in this recent column which I do for [I]Community Sports News[/I] here in Cackalacky:
I wrote it just as the Kendall Jones thing was hitting the fan, and it ran at the height of the hysteria. My lede was Eva Shockey, though, since the KJ thing had just gotten on my radar and at the time was just at a low boil.
Copyright [I]Community Sports News [/I]2014, Reprinted with permission.
[I][B]Bear Claws and Butter Cookies[/B]
For only the second time in its 119-year history, a woman has appeared solo on Field & Stream's cover, and in the age of the internet and "social media" a couple of brushfires have gotten a blast of oxygen because of it.
Eva Shockey, the 25 year-old daughter of renowned hunting guide, outdoor video host and hunting industry spokesman Jim Shockey, follows Queen Elizabeth, who appeared on the F&S cover in 1976 for some reason (along with some of her hunting dogs). Maybe that was for the bicentennial, but nearly four decades later, Eva Shockey seems a much better choice. Extremely easy on the eyes, well-spoken and possessed of an engaging personality, Shockey is held up by F&S in the cover theme as an example of "What's Next" in the "Rising Star" category, along with "New Science---Why a Gobbler is Smarter Than You" and "Hot Spots---Best New Wild Places in Every State".
I remember when outdoor mass media wasn't a joke. In today's age of hype and short attention spans, it's almost possible that Ms. Shockey truly is a rising star (whatever that means) with far less than a decade of hunting experience under her belt. And to give her some credit, this praise is not in the same realm as declaring a turkey smarter than you or "discovering " such a thing as a new wild place in the U.S. (And can there really be one in every state? Seems a bit incredible.)
So we've long-since jumped the shark, but that's beside the point. The Shockey cover and the lightweight five-question mini-interview inside caused a flare-up on at least two fronts, judging by chatter of the electronic, inked and campfire variety.
First and least interestingly, it brought out all the guys who have bees in their bonnets about high-profile outdoorsmen. The fact that Shockey is an attractive young woman rather than a grizzled old woods-wizard drives some of this tribe straight over the cliff, but it's not mainly a sexism thing. They'd have the same sour things to say about any young hotshot with a goatee or a protruding adam's apple. This crew thinks if you hire a guide or hunt low-pressure private land, or if you don't do everything that they do, you're not a "real" hunter. You haven't paid your dues. God forbid you fit that profile AND have contacts in the outdoor industry. And double God-forbid if you derive any or all of your income from the outdoors. Jealousy explains a lot of this, but not all.
I have a buddy who sees the root of all evil in all forms of hunting other than "If it's brown, it's down", because everything about "modern hunting" is a capitalist conspiracy fueled by antler porn these days, according to him. He'll question where a conservation group like the Quality Deer Management Association gets its money. Seriously. (The answer is they get it from donations and member dues, just like any other conservation group. Not from Big Hunting, Big Pharma, Big Oil or from any other Big.)
Another friend issues an annual challenge over the innerwebz to TV hunting "celebrities" the Drury Brothers: they are to hunt his public land in heavily-pressured, deep-woods Pennsylvania while he goes out to their private, intensively managed farmland in Iowa and Missouri, and everyone dukes it out over the course of a week or so to decide who the greatest hunter really is. So far, the Drury boys haven't taken him up on it, a source of great pride for my friend---especially in the years when he eats tag soup, which is most of them. He still wins the measuring contest by default, and is happy to tell you so.
I think a 25 year-old Rob Lowe-type would get just about the same level of skepticism from the geezers sitting around the pickle barrel as Shockey has, if he were labeled a "Rising Star" in the hunting universe as quickly as Miss Eva has been. It's really an earn-your-chops thing.
If there's sexism involved, it might mostly come whipping in with the second brushfire I alluded to. That's the one getting stoked not by fellow hunters, but by anti-hunters of all stripes, from the professionally aggrieved all the way down to the amateurishly outraged. The level of vitriol aimed at women hunters in the public eye, especially if they use or otherwise appear in social media, is especially vicious and completely off the charts. Even if you're familiar with the anti-hunting extremism such outlets seem to amplify in the normal course of things-- when it's just some dime-a-dozen evil white male redneck troglodyte in the crosshairs--this version has a special nastiness to it.
Shockey is just the latest target of internet trolls and reactionary blogger-types who get especially hysterical when a woman professes to hunt. Do these bomb-throwers feel threatened by women increasing (and increasingly visible) in the hunting ranks? Is it just that they feel the women hunters are easier targets than men? I think it's a little of both. Many antis literally and very predictably wish death and damnation on anyone who hunts, and of course most don't have any idea what they're talking about if they ever stray from the ad hominem screeching. You would never know how many rare and endangered species there are in the world if you didn't read their internet posts, and the things you learn about animal behavior from people who wouldn't know a bear claw from a butter cookie is truly mind-boggling.
But just when you think the antis have reached epic levels of stupidity, they kick in the afterburners where women hunters are involved. A startling amount of venom aimed at hunters like Shockey comes from women, often some of the most ardent antis, but this is by no means restricted to social media's "Mean Girls". Supposedly adult men are happy to get in on the action as well. When Texas Tech cheerleader Kendall Jones posted some pictures of legal and non-endangered animals taken in Africa recently, the usual suspects of both sexes went nuts. My favorite rebuke of one agitator though, was that he should "stop picking on 19 year-old girls."
Though I hope the guy was shamed, I doubt he repented. In the face of pressure from antis, Facebook recently deleted some of Ms. Jones pictures, without explanation. The site seems okay with death threats and hate-filled posts from anti-hunters, saying on more than one occasion and to more than one huntress that they do not violate their "community standards", but I guess tasteful, bloodless hunter-and-quarry pics are out of bounds.
You can look up the names Melissa Bachman, Olivia Opre, Amanda Lowery and many others to see that backlash against women hunters---including highly personalized attack---is far from an isolated occurrence. Eva Shockey has admitted in interviews that it's surprising and hurtful. She and others seem to take it in stride, however, and note that there are almost 3.5 million females who hunt in the U.S., and their numbers are growing. In fact, their numbers grew 10 percent between 2008 and 2012, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, compared to just under two percent for men.
So it may be true that women like Shockey are "What's Next"... but the griping about it won't be "What's New."
[/I]
Copyright [I]Community Sports News [/I]2014, Reprinted with permission.
I wrote it just as the Kendall Jones thing was hitting the fan, and it ran at the height of the hysteria. My lede was Eva Shockey, though, since the KJ thing had just gotten on my radar and at the time was just at a low boil.
Copyright [I]Community Sports News [/I]2014, Reprinted with permission.
[I][B]Bear Claws and Butter Cookies[/B]
For only the second time in its 119-year history, a woman has appeared solo on Field & Stream's cover, and in the age of the internet and "social media" a couple of brushfires have gotten a blast of oxygen because of it.
Eva Shockey, the 25 year-old daughter of renowned hunting guide, outdoor video host and hunting industry spokesman Jim Shockey, follows Queen Elizabeth, who appeared on the F&S cover in 1976 for some reason (along with some of her hunting dogs). Maybe that was for the bicentennial, but nearly four decades later, Eva Shockey seems a much better choice. Extremely easy on the eyes, well-spoken and possessed of an engaging personality, Shockey is held up by F&S in the cover theme as an example of "What's Next" in the "Rising Star" category, along with "New Science---Why a Gobbler is Smarter Than You" and "Hot Spots---Best New Wild Places in Every State".
I remember when outdoor mass media wasn't a joke. In today's age of hype and short attention spans, it's almost possible that Ms. Shockey truly is a rising star (whatever that means) with far less than a decade of hunting experience under her belt. And to give her some credit, this praise is not in the same realm as declaring a turkey smarter than you or "discovering " such a thing as a new wild place in the U.S. (And can there really be one in every state? Seems a bit incredible.)
So we've long-since jumped the shark, but that's beside the point. The Shockey cover and the lightweight five-question mini-interview inside caused a flare-up on at least two fronts, judging by chatter of the electronic, inked and campfire variety.
First and least interestingly, it brought out all the guys who have bees in their bonnets about high-profile outdoorsmen. The fact that Shockey is an attractive young woman rather than a grizzled old woods-wizard drives some of this tribe straight over the cliff, but it's not mainly a sexism thing. They'd have the same sour things to say about any young hotshot with a goatee or a protruding adam's apple. This crew thinks if you hire a guide or hunt low-pressure private land, or if you don't do everything that they do, you're not a "real" hunter. You haven't paid your dues. God forbid you fit that profile AND have contacts in the outdoor industry. And double God-forbid if you derive any or all of your income from the outdoors. Jealousy explains a lot of this, but not all.
I have a buddy who sees the root of all evil in all forms of hunting other than "If it's brown, it's down", because everything about "modern hunting" is a capitalist conspiracy fueled by antler porn these days, according to him. He'll question where a conservation group like the Quality Deer Management Association gets its money. Seriously. (The answer is they get it from donations and member dues, just like any other conservation group. Not from Big Hunting, Big Pharma, Big Oil or from any other Big.)
Another friend issues an annual challenge over the innerwebz to TV hunting "celebrities" the Drury Brothers: they are to hunt his public land in heavily-pressured, deep-woods Pennsylvania while he goes out to their private, intensively managed farmland in Iowa and Missouri, and everyone dukes it out over the course of a week or so to decide who the greatest hunter really is. So far, the Drury boys haven't taken him up on it, a source of great pride for my friend---especially in the years when he eats tag soup, which is most of them. He still wins the measuring contest by default, and is happy to tell you so.
I think a 25 year-old Rob Lowe-type would get just about the same level of skepticism from the geezers sitting around the pickle barrel as Shockey has, if he were labeled a "Rising Star" in the hunting universe as quickly as Miss Eva has been. It's really an earn-your-chops thing.
If there's sexism involved, it might mostly come whipping in with the second brushfire I alluded to. That's the one getting stoked not by fellow hunters, but by anti-hunters of all stripes, from the professionally aggrieved all the way down to the amateurishly outraged. The level of vitriol aimed at women hunters in the public eye, especially if they use or otherwise appear in social media, is especially vicious and completely off the charts. Even if you're familiar with the anti-hunting extremism such outlets seem to amplify in the normal course of things-- when it's just some dime-a-dozen evil white male redneck troglodyte in the crosshairs--this version has a special nastiness to it.
Shockey is just the latest target of internet trolls and reactionary blogger-types who get especially hysterical when a woman professes to hunt. Do these bomb-throwers feel threatened by women increasing (and increasingly visible) in the hunting ranks? Is it just that they feel the women hunters are easier targets than men? I think it's a little of both. Many antis literally and very predictably wish death and damnation on anyone who hunts, and of course most don't have any idea what they're talking about if they ever stray from the ad hominem screeching. You would never know how many rare and endangered species there are in the world if you didn't read their internet posts, and the things you learn about animal behavior from people who wouldn't know a bear claw from a butter cookie is truly mind-boggling.
But just when you think the antis have reached epic levels of stupidity, they kick in the afterburners where women hunters are involved. A startling amount of venom aimed at hunters like Shockey comes from women, often some of the most ardent antis, but this is by no means restricted to social media's "Mean Girls". Supposedly adult men are happy to get in on the action as well. When Texas Tech cheerleader Kendall Jones posted some pictures of legal and non-endangered animals taken in Africa recently, the usual suspects of both sexes went nuts. My favorite rebuke of one agitator though, was that he should "stop picking on 19 year-old girls."
Though I hope the guy was shamed, I doubt he repented. In the face of pressure from antis, Facebook recently deleted some of Ms. Jones pictures, without explanation. The site seems okay with death threats and hate-filled posts from anti-hunters, saying on more than one occasion and to more than one huntress that they do not violate their "community standards", but I guess tasteful, bloodless hunter-and-quarry pics are out of bounds.
You can look up the names Melissa Bachman, Olivia Opre, Amanda Lowery and many others to see that backlash against women hunters---including highly personalized attack---is far from an isolated occurrence. Eva Shockey has admitted in interviews that it's surprising and hurtful. She and others seem to take it in stride, however, and note that there are almost 3.5 million females who hunt in the U.S., and their numbers are growing. In fact, their numbers grew 10 percent between 2008 and 2012, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, compared to just under two percent for men.
So it may be true that women like Shockey are "What's Next"... but the griping about it won't be "What's New."
[/I]
Copyright [I]Community Sports News [/I]2014, Reprinted with permission.
36.) luv2bowhunt - 07/21/2014
"Another friend issues an annual challenge over the innerwebz to TV hunting "celebrities" the Drury Brothers: they are to hunt his public land in heavily-pressured, deep-woods Pennsylvania while he goes out to their private, intensively managed farmland in Iowa and Missouri, and everyone dukes it out over the course of a week or so to decide who the greatest hunter really is. So far, the Drury boys haven't taken him up on it, a source of great pride for my friend---especially in the years when he eats tag soup, which is most of them. He still wins the measuring contest by default, and is happy to tell you so."
I think you know, but I'll state it for everyone else. For me this has always been more 'comedy' than 'jealousy'. Although I would luv to film them hunting a PA State Forest.
I'd do it for free for a week.
.........and they are cowards.:wink
I think you know, but I'll state it for everyone else. For me this has always been more 'comedy' than 'jealousy'. Although I would luv to film them hunting a PA State Forest.
I'd do it for free for a week.
.........and they are cowards.:wink
37.) Swamp Fox - 07/21/2014
I know...I just couldn't resist working you into the piece, and working you over...
:wink
:wink
38.) bluecat - 07/21/2014
We all enjoy that.
39.) luv2bowhunt - 07/21/2014
Also, you called me a 'friend' and that really pisses me off.:re:
40.) Swamp Fox - 07/21/2014
LOL...
41.) billy b - 07/21/2014
Poor use of words Swampy.
42.) Swamp Fox - 07/21/2014
Yes, I know it's sad...But then we all know I'm a sucker for stray animals and so it kinda makes sense...