LGBT (sub)section?
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-06-2017, 08:31 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 07:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

Having 'Lunch' eating a "Foot-long" white bread club sammich wi 'Double' Old English cheese, garlic aolia(sp?) Sauce.
...
EDIT: On phone. .. no idea how post ended up here. Sad Terribly sorry. Could Mods adjust, please?

Dude, next lunch-break head over to the optician.

This isn't a conversation about BLTs

Laugh out load

Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
16-06-2017, 08:34 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 08:31 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 07:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

Having 'Lunch' eating a "Foot-long" white bread club sammich wi 'Double' Old English cheese, garlic aolia(sp?) Sauce.
...
EDIT: On phone. .. no idea how post ended up here. Sad Terribly sorry. Could Mods adjust, please?

Dude, next lunch-break head over to the optician.

This isn't a conversation about BLTs

Laugh out load

Should have gone to Specsavers. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
16-06-2017, 08:38 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
The thing, Jenny, and I absolutely see where you coming from, I hate conflict, too, is I've been here, sadly, long enough, to see Earmuffs do similar things to more than one person. So in this case, no, I don't think it's just the way he is and he really doesn't mean it. He does mean it and he's repeatedly gone after people in a demeaning and vindictive way, yet, is absolutely incapable of dealing with it, when people decide not to turn the other cheek.

As for words only hurt if you let them, we'll have to agree to disagree. Free speech is a very fluid concept (and absolute free speech is impossible, that's not how societies work), hurting (already vulnerable) people - much less fluid. I guess we all get to decide what is more important to us.

Also, for all those who seem incapable of grasping it, there is a HUGE difference between attacking someone, personally, for the shitty things they say and the shitty human being they are, and attacking someone for the colour of their skin, the shape of their nose, what they have between their legs and who they they have between their sheets. I thought that was obvious, but apparently, not...

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Find all posts by this user
16-06-2017, 08:41 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 08:26 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 08:13 AM)jennybee Wrote:  I took it to mean: Free speech, people are going to say what they are going to say, either way, don't let what comes out of their mouths impact you. (I know that's not easy to do). Even with the ability of free speech, choose to be excellent to each other instead of tearing each other down.

Exactly. I admire the ability to act respectful even with the freedom and recognition of the fact that they don't have to.

Absolutely. And there are many people on these forums that agree. But there are others who simply lack the ability to be respect or just plain refuse to be respectful simply because they don't have to. Should we just let them "be" without pushing back? Should we let them spew shit and silently ignore it because we know "that's just how this person is and we've come to accept it, and so should you"? Fuck that. I'll say something about it. And so should you.

And I know that almost everyone fails to behave respectfully at points. I also admire people that when they make a mistake, they acknowledge it apologize for it and try to learn from. Those people genuinely care about and empathize with other people.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Emma's post
16-06-2017, 08:43 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 07:25 AM)Vera Wrote:  So, when Emma gets offended at being called tranny (a deeply transphobic slur) and AIDS (what infantile excuse for a brain even does this?) it's her fault for being offended.

When I call the person who publicly told a woman her cunt made the Grand Canyon look like a crack in a pavement out on it, you ride in on a high horse, all moral indignation and superiority?

You know, Ato, I don't give a fuck if you're surprised, slightly or otherwise.

And I pity every single person on this forum (and in general) who thinks flinging transphobic abuse at people is okay and that the abused one should just grow a thick skin.


Jenny, what exactly is the good point of calling people trannies (repeatedly) and AIDS? I kind of fail to see it. Drinking Beverage

I'm not sitting on a high horse, I'm just saying that for a person who is going to criticize a person for saying offensive things, you dished them out. That's equivilent to decrying guns and then promptly shooting a gun supporter to show them why they need gun regulation. Also, notice that a I didn't even judge you at all, I was just saying that it was surprising that you choose to stoop down (and it's not too far down either) to muffs level. I didn't say it was good nor bad, just that it was surprising, that's all.

As for Emma, trying is a part of being excellent, but the problem is it's a choice, and demanding it and imposing it on other people is something that I find unsupportable. I like you Emma, I think you are wonderful, in many ways I support you, and it's because I like you that I will respect you. However, to demand that of people that don't like you instead of maybe coming the conclusion that those people aren't even worth your thoughts or concerns might be unwise.

When you say that everyone should try to be respectful to you, you are saying that everyone should put away their personal feelings/opinions to try make it a better world for you to live in, I find that to be a little inconsiderate from the people that claim to just want consideration for them. It's better off, in my opinion, that people are taught that there will be mean things said about them, and to have to learn to deal with them while also trying to spread awareness.

Does that make any sense?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
16-06-2017, 08:46 AM (This post was last modified: 16-06-2017 08:51 AM by Vera.)
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
Also, for all those who seem incapable of grasping it, there is a HUGE difference between attacking someone, personally, for the shitty things they say and the shitty human being they are, and attacking someone for the colour of their skin, the shape of their nose, what they have between their legs and who they they have between their sheets. I thought that was obvious, but apparently, not...

Facepalm

And why do you think I care that you were surprised or what you think of what I have to say? It's my god-given right to free-speech, isn't it, as it was your "proclivity" to be surprised Drinking Beverage

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Vera's post
16-06-2017, 08:55 AM (This post was last modified: 16-06-2017 09:45 AM by Atothetheist.)
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 08:46 AM)Vera Wrote:  Also, for all those who seem incapable of grasping it, there is a HUGE difference between attacking someone, personally, for the shitty things they say and the shitty human being they are, and attacking someone for the colour of their skin, the shape of their nose, what they have between their legs and who they they have between their sheets. I thought that was obvious, but apparently, not...

Facepalm

We all recognize the difference, Vera. It's a matter of just being above all of it. You can argue with muffs without resorting to insults, he clearly seems incapable or unwilling. I see this as an Atticus Finch, calmly looking at the man who just spit in his face, situation. You need not to respond with vitriol, but rather with the poise and rationality that you are so famous for. Even if Muffs won't listen to anything but insults, other people can learn for the encounter.

You missed the point of my comment.

Also, muffs from my experience is a troll, an awesome, funny troll at that, but a troll nonetheless. He is a just a person certain people won't like, and the way I see it, it's not like he is lynching transsexuals or black people or anyone, but rather being rather uncouth in his speech. I have friends who are civil and also very uncouth, but when push comes to shove, they will defend the rights of any "Tranny" (no offense intended) or African- American or gay person. Muffs is as, far as I can remember, a self-titled faggot. This is the way he views the world and he views words differently than you do and I have to say, I lean more towards his line of thinking than the opposite side of the fence. Words are a tool, and they have meanings that are contextual in nature. I think a good, uncouth racist joke is funny, but I do not support subjugation, genicide or otherwise acts towards races. I can see the difference and in tent.

Also, I would like to talk about Emma's, assertion that some people might not be strong enough to cope with words. That might be the case, but i have to ask: Is that because they JUST CAN'T, or because they were never properly taught that they have to or even taught how to? And is banning words or practices that might prevent those behaviors condusive to producing people that can have thick skin ( a really good trait in my opinion, some may disagree.) I see it very much like a immune system defense, where you body has to be exposed to pathogens (weakened or not) in order to start to have the tools to deal and endure them. A person who hasn't encountered a disease isn't strong against it, but rather the most vulnerable to it. Maybe that's just another difference of opinion.

As far as I understood Muffs original, topical criticism, is that a LGBTQ+ subforum would only distinguish them from others, which is fine if that's what you want, but some people believe that it's not that significant of a difference between heteronormative, cis, or any other buzzword and should be intergrated so that it's not looked at as anything different, but rather normal and natural. It's a matter of perspective.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like Atothetheist's post
16-06-2017, 08:58 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
Excuse me, but who made you the judge of how I should talk to people? Seriously, are you even listening to yourself?

And I don't give a fuck about your friends. First, we are talking about one person, not in general, and second, if you know something is hurtful and you still keep doing it, you're a jerk. Easy as that.

But I guess empathy is hard to find, isn't it?

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Find all posts by this user
16-06-2017, 09:10 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 08:58 AM)Vera Wrote:  Excuse me, but who made you the judge of how I should talk to people? Seriously, are you even listening to yourself?

And I don't give a fuck about your friends. First, we are talking about one person, not in general, and second, if you know something is hurtful and you still keep doing it, you're a jerk. Easy as that.

But I guess empathy is hard to find, isn't it?

I don't need to be a judge to see the obvious. Anyone can judge anybody else, just like you do to others. I'm just commenting. Empathy isn't hard to find. Not everyone that is seemingly stupid enough to be on the other side is unempathetic, but rather they have a different perspective that is failing to cross over, much like yours seems to fail to see mine.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
16-06-2017, 09:12 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 08:55 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 08:46 AM)Vera Wrote:  Also, for all those who seem incapable of grasping it, there is a HUGE difference between attacking someone, personally, for the shitty things they say and the shitty human being they are, and attacking someone for the colour of their skin, the shape of their nose, what they have between their legs and who they they have between their sheets. I thought that was obvious, but apparently, not...

Facepalm

We all recognize the difference, Vera. It's a matter of just being above all of it. You can argue with muffs without resorting to insults, he clearly seems incapable or unwilling. I see this as an Atticus Finch, calmly looking at the man who just spit in his face, situation. You need not to respond with vitriol, but rather with the poise and rationality that you are so famous for. Even if Muffs won't listen to anything but insults, other people can learn for the encounter.

You missed the point of my comment.

Also, muffs from my experience is a troll, an awesome, funny troll at that, but a troll nonetheless. He is a just a person certain people won't like, and the way I see it, it's not like he is lynching transsexuals or black people or anyone, but rather being rather uncouth in his speech. I have friends who are civil and also very uncouth, but when push comes to shove, they will defend the rights of any "Tranny" (no offense intended) or African- American or gay person. Muffs is as, far as I can remember, a self-titled faggot. This is the way he views the world and he views words differently than you do and I have to say, I lean more towards his line of thinking than the opposite side of the fence. Words are a tool, and they have meanings that are contextual in nature. I think a good, uncouth racist joke is funny, but I do not support subjugation, genicide or otherwise acts towards races. I can see the difference and in tent.

Also, I would like to talk about Emma's, assertion that some people might not be strong enough to cope with words. That might be the case, but i have to ask: Is that because they JUST CAN'T, or because they were never properly taught that they have to or even taught how to? And is banning words or practices that might prevent those behaviors condusive to producing people that can have thick skin ( a really good trait in my opinion, some may disagree.) I see it very much like a immune system defense, where you body has to be exposed to pathogens (weakened or not) or order to start to have the tools to deal and endure them. a person who hasn't encountered a disease isn't strong against it, but rather the most vulnerable. Maybe that's just another difference of opinion.

As far as I understood Muffs original, topical criticism, is that a LGBTQ+ subforum would only distinguish them from others, which is fine if that's what you want, but some people believe that it's not that significant of a difference between heteronormative, cis, or any other buzzword and should be intergrated so that it's not looked at as anything different, but rather normal and natural. It's a matter of perspective.

See, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to sit back and ignore muffs' behavior. I've already explained why. You can, though.

I've engaged with muffs and other people on this forum who used transphobic/homophobic language quite calmly (and sometimes quite un-calmly). I honestly do not care if others look down on me for engaging it. Because I think his bullshit should be challenged and not accepted. And to simply call it uncouth is to excuse it as "rough around the edges". To brush him off as a troll is to excuse him, too. No, he behaves in a bitter and vile manner. And I've seen it time and again. He's capable of expressing himself without being a troll, but we don't call him to discussion on a higher level, do we? Nah, because it's 'muffs.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like Emma's post
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: