Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



vassilissa ([info]vassilissa) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2009-12-15 18:54:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Satanic ritual abuse wank
I dithered about whether to put this in unfunnybusiness or here, but in the end Satanic Ritual Abuse is not real, and what the person who said it was said was so funny it belonged here.

People who blatantly deny the existence of ritual abuse after being offered solid resources to the contrary demonstrate that they don’t need evidence about its existence. Instead, when they continue to deny its existence in a seemingly obsessive manner, they are more likely trolling for new victims in hopes that responding survivors will – while more emotional – slip-up and provide vulnerable, personal information.

There you go. If you deny the existance of ritual abuse, it's because you're looking for new victims to ritually abuse.


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]caffeine_fairy
2009-12-15 12:15 pm UTC (link)
Could someone point out the funny? I'm clearly missing something.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]phosfate
2009-12-15 04:07 pm UTC (link)
The book's illustrations are pretty hilarious.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]puipui
2009-12-15 06:37 pm UTC (link)
There's some funny in the comments on the two posts about the books, but you have to avoid the comment that was actually posted here to find it, and none of it is actually wank.

This one's my personal favorite:

From the updated version of this book: “Doctor, she has terrible nightmares about the righteous Fred Phelps, she won’t eat any food that isn’t organic, and she becomes upset when I ask her to wear a dress. SOMETHING IS WRONG! She even replaced the dog with a cat this week. Look at her now, pretending to be a man in that suit! I think something bad happened to her at that community co-op play group.”

- “Hurts of Childhood/Parental Fears: Liberalism Strikes!”


Heh.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]kitt_in_socks
2009-12-15 09:01 pm UTC (link)
That just makes me want to bash someone's head against a wall 'cause up through college there were people who insisted something was wrong with me because I didn't like dresses. Including the principle of my K-8, who decided it was my fault I was getting bullied and maybe some peer pressure would make me act like a real girl.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]caffeine_fairy
2009-12-15 09:59 pm UTC (link)
*readies baseball bat*

His/her address?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]brennalarose
2009-12-15 10:33 pm UTC (link)
Wait up! *gets croquet mallet*

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]ghostmaster
2009-12-15 10:01 pm UTC (link)
Stories like this are what make me realize how good I had it as a child. Went to a Christian school where few of the girls liked dresses simply because we were forced to wear them/look frumpy in them. I was still the weird girl, but most everyone was content to leave me alone as long as I didn't try to stand out.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]puipui
2009-12-16 03:20 am UTC (link)
See, even the parodies bring out the unfunny in this one.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]kitt_in_socks
2009-12-16 03:50 am UTC (link)
Yeah, sorry, looks like I forgot my towel.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2009-12-16 03:59 am UTC (link)
No, no, it's not your fault! The whole post was just set up to fail from the beginning, and once it starts heading towards unfunnybusiness, there's almost no way to get it back, because everything that gets said reminds everyone of more unfunnybusiness, because that's where everyone's head is. It's a horrible cycle. :(

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]kitt_in_socks
2009-12-16 04:11 am UTC (link)
I think the only answer is kittens. Lots and lots of liberal commie adorable kittens.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2009-12-16 06:44 pm UTC (link)
Liberal commie kittens are the best kind of kittens!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sandglass
2009-12-15 11:18 pm UTC (link)
She even replaced the dog with a cat this week.

How does that even?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2009-12-16 03:33 am UTC (link)
It's a joke. It's a parody. In the original book, as quoted, the mother knows there's something wrong with her little girl because the little girl bit a dog this week, which must mean SATAN! In the parody version, updated for our times, as you'd see it written by the same type of people who got so freaked out over OMG SATAN IN MY DAYCARE only now it's about OMG LIBERALS IN MY GOVERNMENT because liberals are their Satan now, the mother knows there's something wrong with her little girl because the little girl replaced their dog with a cat this week, which must mean LIBERALS!

I should probably explain here that big strong dogs are stereotypically the pet of choice for strident teabagging conservatives, while cats are thought of as foofy liberal pets who are not patriotic enough to be Real Americans. I'm making an exception, of course, for those little teacup doggies, which are stereotypically the pet of choice for extremely annoying and incredibly vapid heiresses who are famous for no real reason, who would probably be Libertarians if they gave it any thought at all (the heiresses, not the dogs - I'm assuming the dogs are Independents).

Would anyone else like any jokes explained, while I'm here? I don't think this post has sucked enough funny out of the world yet, I think we should go for more.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]sandglass
2009-12-16 03:46 am UTC (link)
Sorry, I misread, I thought it was a real book. There's some kind of rule for that, no matter how ridiculous your religious satire is, someone on the Internet will think its real. Sorry.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2009-12-16 03:55 am UTC (link)
It's very hard to tell sometimes, that's true. I think I've heard an actual name for that rule, come to think of it, but I can't remember it offhand. I hope it includes the word "Colbert" in there somewhere, though.

Also, it's worth it to note that there is, in fact, a real book, published recently, called Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! but I don't think it accuses anyone of ritual sexual abuse. That's probably for the sequel.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]eljuno
2009-12-16 06:20 pm UTC (link)
Is it Poe's Law? http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2009-12-16 06:43 pm UTC (link)
That's the one! Thank you!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]agent_hyatt
2009-12-17 04:51 am UTC (link)
The daycare is messing up if she's getting nightmares about Fred Phelps. They should've conditioned her to snicker at the mention of his name.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map