I do not believe in eliminating words. It is the height of laziness to try to censor certain vocabulary in *all* situations, because it may be offensive in *specific* situations. I highly doubt that you're offended on behalf of President Trump, here.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but there is IMO a terrifyingly short path from considering words streng verboten, and holding a book burning in the town square. It is an unacceptable censorship.
OH FUCK OFF
Last edited by A_B on Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
To be clear, I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I'm just saying I think that trimming any vocabulary that could ever be offensive is bad precedent. From a practical perspective, I admit there are probably better choices of wording.
brian wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:47 am
So I suppose you’d be OK with someone calling you a pretentious fuckmuppet because otherwise the book burners win, huh?
Not only that, I encourage it. ;-)
I don't support being a dick, but I will defend to the death the *right* to be a dick.
Ryan wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:52 am
I think you need to recognize the difference between someone telling you the word should be eliminated and someone telling you to eliminate the word
Oh no, you're totally right. The former I am fine with, it's an opinion like anything else.
Ryan wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:52 am
I think you need to recognize the difference between someone telling you the word should be eliminated and someone telling you to eliminate the word
Oh no, you're totally right. The former I am fine with, it's an opinion like anything else.
I think you missed his point.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
Ryan wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:52 am
I think you need to recognize the difference between someone telling you the word should be eliminated and someone telling you to eliminate the word
Oh no, you're totally right. The former I am fine with, it's an opinion like anything else.
That it would actually be really nice if both of those things happened. But a guy on a message board can't make the whole world stop saying things - he can point out that it's not civil to say things that are demonstrably mean and legitimately harmful to huge numbers of others.
Even so, after hundreds of years of incremental changes to our social vocabulary, how many words are illegal to say at the bottom of our slippery slope?
Last edited by Ryan on Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:04 am, edited 2 times in total.
he’s a fixbking cyborg or some shit. The
holy fuckbAllZ, what a ducking nightmare. Holy shot. Just, fuck. The
Pruitt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:00 am
If someone who you are interacting with is offended by a word, than you should probably stop using it in their presence.
Not the same as censorship - more like politeness.
Well, I certainly entirely agree with that. Though I do think one should consider the context fully before deciding to be offended.
Pruitt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:00 am
If someone who you are interacting with is offended by a word, than you should probably stop using it in their presence.
Not the same as censorship - more like politeness.
RIght. I don't think anyone expects the word to no longer exist or be "banned" but it's pretty easy to remove from your personal vocabulary in the way you used it.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
For the record, "cunt" is still okay when you are using it describe a man, right? Like "man, look at this cunt president sucking Putin's dick right now."
My avatar corresponds on my place in the Swamp posting list with the all-time Home Run list. Number 45 is Paul Konerko with 439.
Ryan wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:03 am
That it would actually be really nice if both of those things happened. But a guy on a message board can't make the whole world stop saying things - he can point out that it's not civil to say things that are demonstrably mean and legitimately harmful to huge numbers of others.
In context, absolutely. The only point I was trying to make is that *no* word (at least, that I can think of) is unconditionally harmful. Certainly, calling a mentally challenged person a "retard" has no place in the world. But if a friend uses that term to describe me after I've cocked something up (which happens A LOT), I certainly don't get offended, and I can't fathom the thinking of someone who would do.
Ryan wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:03 am
Even so, after hundreds of years of incremental changes our social vocabulary, how many words are illegal to say at the bottom of our slippery slope?
Illegal? Very few or none in most places. But there are shockingly many that will get you metaphorically raked over the coals (and maybe worse), even when used with benign intent. That is what bothers me.
The *idea* behind the words is what should be offensive or not, civil or not. Quibbling over the language when there is clearly no harmful intent does no one any good, IMO. It is just facile.
But that's the theory. Certainly, if someone *is* offended, whether or not one thinks they *should* be, it is always good practice to stop offending them.
Last edited by RSmith on Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:26 am, edited 4 times in total.
L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:08 am
For the record, "cunt" is still okay when you are using it describe a man, right? Like "man, look at this cunt president sucking Putin's dick right now."
Pruitt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 9:00 am
To me, that is the brilliance of the piece. It's one thing to get a lunatic like the guy holding the kiddie guns to do anything on camera. it's quite another to get influential lawmakers espousing insane ideas because some lobbyist told them that they should.
Exactly! It's truly frightening to see the horrific things these assholes in Congress will say to appease their donors and lobbyists. When I first read about the interviews, I expected it wouldn't be as bad as the articles seemed, or SBC would say something ridiculous and they'd nod agreement. Watching the full clip, these assholes actually made comments worse than what SBC said. When SBC said he wanted to teach preschoolers how to kill, the guy added that preschoolers haven't developed a conscience yet, so they are perfect for military purposes. The other asshole was told he was making an instructional video teaching 3 year olds how to kill. He held guns wrapped in stuffed animals, and sang about where to aim to kill someone. FFS. I saw a brief clip of SBC duping Bernie Sanders, and Sanders just looked at him and said, "I have no idea what you are talking about." Maybe it's different because SBC posed as an idiotic RW commentator, but if he posed as an idiotic Liberal activist, I doubt Bernie would have agreed to killing bankers or something.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:47 pm
Once again...
These people didn't know they were duped until they were told they were duped.
They were given plane tickets to an event in DC for a pro Israel award and interviewed.
These interviews were conducted a while ago.
Just now they are complaining. Just now. Now that they've been outed. They are now victims of a prank. Not months ago.
Spare me the bullshit, RSmith.
And you're assuming that the reason they are complaining now, and not then, is that they actually were entirely on board with what was being said, and are now trying to cover themselves.
I certainly can't prove that you're wrong, but that would not seem to me the most likely explanation.
Considering the baseless depths to which the GOP will go and callousness of their collective character, I'm going to bank on the fact they were entirely on board with everything.
Sure I don't know it to be 100% true because I can't be a fly on the wall for all their disgusting meetings. But let's get real. This isn't some courtroom where you can argue what you're arguing. Years and years of them being who they are gives me my evidence.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:10 pm
Considering the baseless depths to which the GOP will go and callousness of their collective character, I'm going to bank on the fact they were entirely on board with everything.
Sure I don't know it to be 100% true because I can't be a fly on the wall for all their disgusting meetings. But let's get real. This isn't some courtroom where you can argue what you're arguing. Years and years of them being who they are gives me my evidence.
You could be right. I'm sure you'd have a better idea than I. I suppose I'm going mostly off of the fact that it's such a bizarre, irrational proposal. I don't know how anyone could legitimately think arming kids is reasonable.
RSmith wrote:But if a friend uses that term to describe me after I've cocked something up (which happens A LOT), I certainly don't get offended, and I can't fathom the thinking of someone who would do.
That’s the problem. Between you and another person, if you want to insult each other like that, go ahead. You throw that into a conversation on a message board like that and you take the risk of offending others. Maybe you do t care if you offend others. That’s on you. I’m not offended. What I can say is that your use of that term renders anything you say before or after or ever completely pointless. It comes from a mind who uses slang that a 12 year old used to use, and isn’t smart enough to think of literally ANY OTHER TERM.
So you know. There isn’t a right way to use that word that isn’t (at its root) insulting to those with developmental disabilities or the people who love and take care of them.
BFJ is the town wizard who runs a magic shop. He also has a golem that he has trained to attack anti-Semites.
The answer to every slaughter and massacre is "more guns."
However you get to that answer is the path these sociopaths take. Arm teachers. Add guards. Take veterans, make them guards, part them at the school. Does he have PTSD? Who fucking cares.. ARM. EVERYONE.
And when they get called out, they claim victimhood. Or blame the person exposing them as the bad guy.
And I say this as a dude who owns several guns, goes shooting semi regularly, and has to maintain currency in order to be deployable.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:02 pm
I envy your ignorance to America's gun culture.
The answer to every slaughter and massacre is "more guns."
However you get to that answer is the path these sociopaths take. Arm teachers. Add guards. Take veterans, make them guards, part them at the school. Does he have PTSD? Who fucking cares.. ARM. EVERYONE.
And when they get called out, they claim victimhood. Or blame the person exposing them as the bad guy.
And I say this as a dude who owns several guns, goes shooting semi regularly, and has to maintain currency in order to be deployable.
To be honest, I've never so much as held a gun in my life; coming from a country where even police don't carry them as a matter of routine, it seems very bizarre to me.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:02 pm
I envy your ignorance to America's gun culture.
The answer to every slaughter and massacre is "more guns."
However you get to that answer is the path these sociopaths take. Arm teachers. Add guards. Take veterans, make them guards, part them at the school. Does he have PTSD? Who fucking cares.. ARM. EVERYONE.
And when they get called out, they claim victimhood. Or blame the person exposing them as the bad guy.
And I say this as a dude who owns several guns, goes shooting semi regularly, and has to maintain currency in order to be deployable.
To be honest, I've never so much as held a gun in my life; coming from a country where even police don't carry them as a matter of routine, it seems very bizarre to me.
It must be, because it's beyond frustrating to live inside it.
RSmith wrote:But if a friend uses that term to describe me after I've cocked something up (which happens A LOT), I certainly don't get offended, and I can't fathom the thinking of someone who would do.
So you know. There isn’t a right way to use that word that isn’t (at its root) insulting to those with developmental disabilities or the people who love and take care of them.
I tried typing this out earlier and couldn't come up with the right words. Nicely put here.
It doesn't matter if it's just you and your buddies, be better than that.
RSmith wrote:But if a friend uses that term to describe me after I've cocked something up (which happens A LOT), I certainly don't get offended, and I can't fathom the thinking of someone who would do.
So you know. There isn’t a right way to use that word that isn’t (at its root) insulting to those with developmental disabilities or the people who love and take care of them.
I tried typing this out earlier and couldn't come up with the right words. Nicely put here.
It doesn't matter if it's just you and your buddies, be better than that.
I think I nailed it, personally.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
Pruitt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 9:00 am
To me, that is the brilliance of the piece. It's one thing to get a lunatic like the guy holding the kiddie guns to do anything on camera. it's quite another to get influential lawmakers espousing insane ideas because some lobbyist told them that they should.
Exactly! It's truly frightening to see the horrific things these assholes in Congress will say to appease their donors and lobbyists. When I first read about the interviews, I expected it wouldn't be as bad as the articles seemed, or SBC would say something ridiculous and they'd nod agreement. Watching the full clip, these assholes actually made comments worse than what SBC said. When SBC said he wanted to teach preschoolers how to kill, the guy added that preschoolers haven't developed a conscience yet, so they are perfect for military purposes. The other asshole was told he was making an instructional video teaching 3 year olds how to kill. He held guns wrapped in stuffed animals, and sang about where to aim to kill someone. FFS. I saw a brief clip of SBC duping Bernie Sanders, and Sanders just looked at him and said, "I have no idea what you are talking about." Maybe it's different because SBC posed as an idiotic RW commentator, but if he posed as an idiotic Liberal activist, I doubt Bernie would have agreed to killing bankers or something.
It's important to make a distinction here. With the HotShot, we're not talking about a slightly reduced-size rifle for teens who are not quite ready for a full-size gun. No, we're talking about a tiny gun intended for the very youngest shooters—the ultimate first gun.
“We're targeting the six- to 12-year-old range and feel that with the inclusion of the one-inch spacer in the box, there will be a longer period that the child can use the rifle, potentially out to 15 years old," explains Cushman.
That's important. With the number of hunters declining, it's crucial to get kids introduced to the sport as early as possible.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
With all due respect, you fairly clearly are. And I'm honestly sorry for that. Like I said, I have no problem not using any particular term if it offends someone; that's only right. The point of the rest of my comments was really just "to me, this shouldn't be offensive", and to a lesser extent "words should not be banned" (which I now see was not what you meant, as Ryan alluded to; my mistake), but that isn't terribly important.
With all due respect, you fairly clearly are. And I'm honestly sorry for that. Like I said, I have no problem not using any particular term if it offends someone; that's only right. The point of the rest of my comments was really just "to me, this shouldn't be offensive", and to a lesser extent "words should not be banned" (which I now see was not what you meant, as Ryan alluded to; my mistake), but that isn't terribly important.
AB was right.
BFJ is the town wizard who runs a magic shop. He also has a golem that he has trained to attack anti-Semites.
With all due respect, you fairly clearly are. And I'm honestly sorry for that. Like I said, I have no problem not using any particular term if it offends someone; that's only right. The point of the rest of my comments was really just "to me, this shouldn't be offensive", and to a lesser extent "words should not be banned" (which I now see was not what you meant, as Ryan alluded to; my mistake), but that isn't terribly important.
Words don’t offend me. Ignorant people do.
BFJ is the town wizard who runs a magic shop. He also has a golem that he has trained to attack anti-Semites.
I think Col. Erran Murad is already my second favorite SBC character behind Borat. Cohen is auctioning off the “waterboarding kit” that Murad got Dick Cheney to sign to raise money for Amnesty International.
Joe K wrote: ↑Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:59 pm
I think Col. Erran Murad is already my second favorite SBC character behind Borat. Cohen is auctioning off the “waterboarding kit” that Murad got Dick Cheney to sign to raise money for Amnesty International.
Don;t know if you ever deal with Israelis... but that accent is absolutely perfect. Just hearing him say his name cracks me up.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Pruitt wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:45 am
Watching this ad for the next Governor of Georgia makes you wonder how Cohen found a way to make these idiots seem even more idiotic...
If you want somebody who failed Algebra. Three times. That's me too.