independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 12th Dec 2018 2:12pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > "Offensive" language
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 4 1234>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 09/21/18 10:51am

djThunderfunk

avatar

"Offensive" language


In another thread in this forum, the thread-starter has repeatedly used the word "retard" & "retarded" as a pejorative as well as engaged in a campaign of fat-shaming and slut-shaming. This is being accepted by most that are participating in the thread because the slurs are being aimed at somebody who is evidently the worst person in the world. It seems as if this kind of language is unacceptable, UNLESS, the target of the language is a dispicable person.

The thing is, not one single argument for why the word "retarded" should be censored includes ANY exceptions, much less as to whom is the target of the slur. In fact, those that support the censorship of the word do not even allow exceptions for context or nuance in situations where NOBODY is being derided and it is merely the WORD being discussed. In fact, the current politically correct standard is to not even utter (or write) the word but instead to refer to it as the R-Word, as if it was as bad as the racial slur referred to as the N-Word (which or course it absolutely is NOT).

Pretty much the same thing with fat-shaming & slut-shaming, there are no exceptions in regards to whom is being targeted because to have any exceptions completely invalidates every argument as to why fat-shaming & slut-shaming should not be tolerated.

Everybody that ever pretends to be offended by the word "retard" or by fat-shaming or slut-shaming (which should include EVERY "feminist") knows this simple truth.

Interestingly, hardly anyone participating in that thread will even acknowledge this language, must less protest it. Even though some of them have defended censorship of such "offensive" language in the past, they sit silent now.

Since I am absolutely NOT offended by the word retarded, even when it is used as pejorative, I am very happy to know that the lefties that populate this forum, or at the very least have participated in that thread, have proven that they have zero regard for the silliness involved with the censorship of the word, do not believe the arguments against it's use and are not offended when it is used pejoratively. That's good, because I really like calling out people when they're acting retarded.

I also think it's perfectly ok to say someone is fat or call a slut a slut. Good to know the feminists here have no problem with that as well.

Of course I realize, that currently in our society, this language is currently socially unacceptable whether I agree with it or not. As such, I'm not in the habit of using it myself, especially in a forum such as this where many are likely to find it offensive. I'm quite frankly shocked at how few are bothered by it in the other thread.

Point of rant: Shame on everybody who has read the repeated slurs in that thread that normally would be "offended" by them but didn't speak up because of their feelings for the subject matter of the thread. When their "values" return at a later date, their hypocritical "opinions" won't mean a thing.

Where am I wrong on this?







[Edited 9/21/18 12:30pm]

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 09/21/18 12:48pm

PurpleSkipper5
8

They all actually prove Alex Jones right and it's hilarious.

Alex Jones is actually a nice guy, he just has the "wrong opinions" therefore people think he's the worst person imaginable

[Edited 9/21/18 12:49pm]

”The people that will end up defining ‘Hate Speech Laws’ are the very people you don’t want to define the Hate Speech Laws” — Jordan B Peterson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 09/21/18 12:53pm

13cjk13

PurpleSkipper58 said:

They all actually prove Alex Jones right and it's hilarious.

Alex Jones is actually a nice guy, he just has the "wrong opinions" therefore people think he's the worst person imaginable

[Edited 9/21/18 12:49pm]

Youre right, most nice guys believe that Sandy Hook was a hoax and then torment the parents of the massacred children. Cool.

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost".
-Thomas Jefferson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 09/21/18 12:56pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

We already have a thread for that. Please, let's focus on the topic. Should this language, that offends some of the people some of the time, be socially unaccetable?

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 09/21/18 12:56pm

PurpleSkipper5
8

13cjk13 said:

PurpleSkipper58 said:

They all actually prove Alex Jones right and it's hilarious.

Alex Jones is actually a nice guy, he just has the "wrong opinions" therefore people think he's the worst person imaginable

[Edited 9/21/18 12:49pm]

Youre right, most nice guys believe that Sandy Hook was a hoax and then torment the parents of the massacred children. Cool.

Stop spreading lies. He never said that.

Plus what's so wrong with questioning elements of an already constroversial event?

”The people that will end up defining ‘Hate Speech Laws’ are the very people you don’t want to define the Hate Speech Laws” — Jordan B Peterson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 09/21/18 12:58pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

Wrong thread. Please and thank you.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 09/21/18 1:00pm

PurpleSkipper5
8

djThunderfunk said:

We already have a thread for that. Please, let's focus on the topic. Should this language, that offends some of the people some of the time, be socially unaccetable?

It depends. Use in comedy? Sure. People are gonna use words that offend people all the time, nothing's gonna stop them.

It's just funny to see the double standard.

Talk about how fat Alex Jones is and no one bats an eye, talk about how ugly and stupid Leslie Jones is and people will have a seizure and deem you literally Adolf Hitler

[Edited 9/21/18 13:01pm]

”The people that will end up defining ‘Hate Speech Laws’ are the very people you don’t want to define the Hate Speech Laws” — Jordan B Peterson
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 09/21/18 1:25pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

13cjk13 said:



PurpleSkipper58 said:


They all actually prove Alex Jones right and it's hilarious.


Alex Jones is actually a nice guy, he just has the "wrong opinions" therefore people think he's the worst person imaginable


[Edited 9/21/18 12:49pm]



Youre right, most nice guys believe that Sandy Hook was a hoax and then torment the parents of the massacred children. Cool.



Jones is a fat subhuman piece of shit. Hopefully he'll have a heart attack or stroke soon
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 09/21/18 1:25pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

PurpleSkipper58 said:

djThunderfunk said:

We already have a thread for that. Please, let's focus on the topic. Should this language, that offends some of the people some of the time, be socially unaccetable?

It depends. Use in comedy? Sure. People are gonna use words that offend people all the time, nothing's gonna stop them.

It's just funny to see the double standard.

Talk about how fat Alex Jones is and no one bats an eye, talk about how ugly and stupid Leslie Jones is and people will have a seizure and deem you literally Adolf Hitler

[Edited 9/21/18 13:01pm]


Without getting into the spefics of the individuals you mention, yes, this is my point.

When you look at the reasons given for why this language should never be acceptable (and those that give the reasons INCLUDE comedy) there is no room for exclusion of dispicable people. In other words, one cannot believe the argument against their use and have an exception, because the existance of an exception negates the entire argument. Therefore, there can be no exceptions.

No?





[Edited 9/21/18 13:27pm]

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 09/21/18 1:26pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

13cjk13 said:

Youre right, most nice guys believe that Sandy Hook was a hoax and then torment the parents of the massacred children. Cool.

Jones is a fat subhuman piece of shit. Hopefully he'll have a heart attack or stroke soon


Wrong thread, please and thank you.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 09/21/18 1:29pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

The important word to remember here is CONTEXT. And INTENT.

There are no bad "words " per se, only bad, or inappropriate contexts, and intentions.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 09/21/18 1:48pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

The important word to remember here is CONTEXT. And INTENT. There are no bad "words " per se, only bad, or inappropriate contexts, and intentions.


I absolutely agree with this entire statement 100%.

The problem is, the people that argue for the censorship of the word "retarded", for example, do NOT agree. They are offended by the word regardless of context and regardless if it's being used as a pejorative or not. They refer to it as the "R-Word". They lobby to have comedy specials removed from Netflix because a comedian made jokes about the word itself, not as derision.

Similarly, feminists generally argue that fat-shaming and slut-shaming is NEVER okay, regardless of the target.

These are the types of people who have molded societal opinion that this language should not be tolerated and strive for it to be censored.

If there are exceptions to their arguments, and I believe there are, then their entire arguments are invalid and exposed as nothing but restrictions against hurting feelings. Offending people and hurting their feelings is rude and rightly frowned upon, but, it should never be censored and those that find it unacceptable should deal with the reality that others don't agree and get over it.

Some of the people that have disagreed with me on this point in this forum in the past, are currently keeping those opinions silent in that other thread. I question the "values" of anyone that could do that as it smells of hypocrisy.

IIRC, in the past, you have always maintained the position you have put forth here, so, I am not referring to you.




[Edited 9/21/18 13:50pm]

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 09/21/18 2:20pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

The important word to remember here is CONTEXT. And INTENT. There are no bad "words " per se, only bad, or inappropriate contexts, and intentions.



Of course you are 100% correct. That fat fuck Alex Jones is the only person I've called fat. Those QAnon retards are the only ones I've called retards....wait. I think I called anyone that listens to that fat fuck Alex Jones a retard, too. If I haven't, well I am doing that now just so we can keep the record clean.

But here's the real deal:

If someone defends that fat fuck Alex Jones' actions against the parents of the children slaughtered at Sandy Hook, they are not a person of integrity or character. It's no more complicated than that.

On the one hand we have me, you, and pretty much every other person in that thread calling that fat fuck what he is - a fat fuck.

On the other hand we have two or three posters defending that fat fuck's heinous actions against the parents of the children slaughtered at Sandy Hook in the name of "free speech". I'm glad I'm not like those people. I couldn't look my kids in the eye if I was.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's paladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 09/21/18 2:25pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

blahblah


You already have your own thread for that bullshit, don't be an ass and hijack this one.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 09/21/18 2:37pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

RodeoSchro said:

blahblah


You already have your own thread for that bullshit, don't be an ass and hijack this one.



You asked where you were wrong and I told you. But I'll make you a deal:

You stay off my thread and I'll stay off yours. Deal?

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's paladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 09/21/18 2:39pm

toejam

avatar

People should be free to express their views using whatever words, terms and phrases they feel are most appropriate to get those views across. I have a strong dislike of language-denying - saying certain words are not allowed to be used (especially when they are denied to people due to their sex, race, religion, nationality, whether they're in or out of some other group, etc.). Sorry, but I like to be able to express my views with the full palette of words in existence.

.

[Edited 9/21/18 14:43pm]

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 09/21/18 2:43pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

djThunderfunk said:


You already have your own thread for that bullshit, don't be an ass and hijack this one.



You asked where you were wrong and I told you. But I'll make you a deal:

You stay off my thread and I'll stay off yours. Deal?


Then you're saying I'm wrong, IF it applies to Alex Jones. That is ludicrous bullshit.

How about, I'll stay on topic on yours and you stay on topic on mine. Deal?

[Edited 9/21/18 14:45pm]

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 09/21/18 2:45pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

toejam said:

People should be free to express their views using whatever words, terms and phrases they feel are most appropriate to get those views across. I have a strong dislike of language-denying - saying certain words are not allowed to be used (especially when they are denied to people due to their sex, race, religion, nationality, whether they're in or out of some other group, etc.). Sorry, but I like to be able to express my views with the full palette of words in existence.

.

[Edited 9/21/18 14:43pm]


Another sentiment that I am 100% in agreement with. Thank you!!

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 09/21/18 2:50pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

RodeoSchro said:



You asked where you were wrong and I told you. But I'll make you a deal:

You stay off my thread and I'll stay off yours. Deal?


Then you're saying I'm wrong, IF it applies to Alex Jones. That is ludicrous bullshit.

How about, I'll stay on topic on yours and you stay on topic on mine. Deal?

[Edited 9/21/18 14:45pm]




I guess that's a "No".

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's paladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 09/21/18 3:03pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

djThunderfunk said:


Then you're saying I'm wrong, IF it applies to Alex Jones. That is ludicrous bullshit.

How about, I'll stay on topic on yours and you stay on topic on mine. Deal?

[Edited 9/21/18 14:45pm]




I guess that's a "No".


Oh, I should submit to YOUR conditions? GTFOOHWTBSYFRC!! lol

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 09/21/18 3:12pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

By calling someone "fat" or "retarded "and basically making fun of them for being overweight or retarded. You don't only offend that person but others who are fat, retarded. Hence why it is not a good idea to say those words. It is the same as saying the N word. If someone called someone the N-word it doesn't only offend the person they are calling the N word but all black people because N word is simply another way or saying it is wrong to be black. It is that simple. Some will say there are black people and N-words but yeah that is simple won't work anymore. Some will say some words are more offensive than others but I guess that depends too on the audience.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 09/21/18 3:17pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

The important word to remember here is CONTEXT. And INTENT. There are no bad "words " per se, only bad, or inappropriate contexts, and intentions.

Well ok but clearly Alex Jones is overweight. Ridiculous, context depends as to what the fuck you are talking about. Bring up context to the word fat when someone means someone is overweight, well you got the wrong context to even argue about pops. We weren't talking a high-fat diet in that thread. So calling Jones a "fat ass" it is because he is overweight. Some sleazeball posters tried to weasle way out in that thread saying well he is "fat" ego something on those lines. Well, that was BS they knew they were wrong but doubled down and didn't stop.

[Edited 9/21/18 15:19pm]

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 09/21/18 3:27pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

toejam said:

People should be free to express their views using whatever words, terms and phrases they feel are most appropriate to get those views across. I have a strong dislike of language-denying - saying certain words are not allowed to be used (especially when they are denied to people due to their sex, race, religion, nationality, whether they're in or out of some other group, etc.). Sorry, but I like to be able to express my views with the full palette of words in existence.

.

[Edited 9/21/18 14:43pm]

Then to you it depends on the intended audience. It is ok to offend some but others are clearly off limits. For instance, if someone called Oprah fat or Obama a retard others will usually say that person is racist. Whereas, some would like to do same with Trump and Jones and they will not say race matters. Yes, it does. Dick Gregory is a champion on the org but Alex Jones hated. Both conspiracy theorists, both believe in NWO and chemtrails and both rallied against the powers that be. Both controversial figures. One black. One white.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 09/21/18 3:34pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

jjhunsecker said:

The important word to remember here is CONTEXT. And INTENT. There are no bad "words " per se, only bad, or inappropriate contexts, and intentions.



Of course you are 100% correct. That fat fuck Alex Jones is the only person I've called fat. Those QAnon retards are the only ones I've called retards....wait. I think I called anyone that listens to that fat fuck Alex Jones a retard, too. If I haven't, well I am doing that now just so we can keep the record clean.

But here's the real deal:

If someone defends that fat fuck Alex Jones' actions against the parents of the children slaughtered at Sandy Hook, they are not a person of integrity or character. It's no more complicated than that.

On the one hand we have me, you, and pretty much every other person in that thread calling that fat fuck what he is - a fat fuck.

On the other hand we have two or three posters defending that fat fuck's heinous actions against the parents of the children slaughtered at Sandy Hook in the name of "free speech". I'm glad I'm not like those people. I couldn't look my kids in the eye if I was.

Hmm for allegedly posting addresses I guess? Wait didn't the majority of the org defend the posting of George Zimmermans address and his families address by celebs that it was FREEDOM OF SPEECH and Public info. Mainstream media does it all the time.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 09/21/18 3:40pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:


In another thread in this forum, the thread-starter has repeatedly used the word "retard" & "retarded" as a pejorative as well as engaged in a campaign of fat-shaming and slut-shaming. This is being accepted by most that are participating in the thread because the slurs are being aimed at somebody who is evidently the worst person in the world. It seems as if this kind of language is unacceptable, UNLESS, the target of the language is a dispicable person.

The thing is, not one single argument for why the word "retarded" should be censored includes ANY exceptions, much less as to whom is the target of the slur. In fact, those that support the censorship of the word do not even allow exceptions for context or nuance in situations where NOBODY is being derided and it is merely the WORD being discussed. In fact, the current politically correct standard is to not even utter (or write) the word but instead to refer to it as the R-Word, as if it was as bad as the racial slur referred to as the N-Word (which or course it absolutely is NOT).

Pretty much the same thing with fat-shaming & slut-shaming, there are no exceptions in regards to whom is being targeted because to have any exceptions completely invalidates every argument as to why fat-shaming & slut-shaming should not be tolerated.

Everybody that ever pretends to be offended by the word "retard" or by fat-shaming or slut-shaming (which should include EVERY "feminist") knows this simple truth.

Interestingly, hardly anyone participating in that thread will even acknowledge this language, must less protest it. Even though some of them have defended censorship of such "offensive" language in the past, they sit silent now.

Since I am absolutely NOT offended by the word retarded, even when it is used as pejorative, I am very happy to know that the lefties that populate this forum, or at the very least have participated in that thread, have proven that they have zero regard for the silliness involved with the censorship of the word, do not believe the arguments against it's use and are not offended when it is used pejoratively. That's good, because I really like calling out people when they're acting retarded.

I also think it's perfectly ok to say someone is fat or call a slut a slut. Good to know the feminists here have no problem with that as well.

Of course I realize, that currently in our society, this language is currently socially unacceptable whether I agree with it or not. As such, I'm not in the habit of using it myself, especially in a forum such as this where many are likely to find it offensive. I'm quite frankly shocked at how few are bothered by it in the other thread.

Point of rant: Shame on everybody who has read the repeated slurs in that thread that normally would be "offended" by them but didn't speak up because of their feelings for the subject matter of the thread. When their "values" return at a later date, their hypocritical "opinions" won't mean a thing.

Where am I wrong on this?







[Edited 9/21/18 12:30pm]



So you started a thread and opened it with a lengthy post because you WEREN'T offended by the words used in a different thread but you ARE offended that nobody else took offense to it either? Do I have that right?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 09/21/18 3:46pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

djThunderfunk said:


In another thread in this forum, the thread-starter has repeatedly used the word "retard" & "retarded" as a pejorative as well as engaged in a campaign of fat-shaming and slut-shaming. This is being accepted by most that are participating in the thread because the slurs are being aimed at somebody who is evidently the worst person in the world. It seems as if this kind of language is unacceptable, UNLESS, the target of the language is a dispicable person.

The thing is, not one single argument for why the word "retarded" should be censored includes ANY exceptions, much less as to whom is the target of the slur. In fact, those that support the censorship of the word do not even allow exceptions for context or nuance in situations where NOBODY is being derided and it is merely the WORD being discussed. In fact, the current politically correct standard is to not even utter (or write) the word but instead to refer to it as the R-Word, as if it was as bad as the racial slur referred to as the N-Word (which or course it absolutely is NOT).

Pretty much the same thing with fat-shaming & slut-shaming, there are no exceptions in regards to whom is being targeted because to have any exceptions completely invalidates every argument as to why fat-shaming & slut-shaming should not be tolerated.

Everybody that ever pretends to be offended by the word "retard" or by fat-shaming or slut-shaming (which should include EVERY "feminist") knows this simple truth.

Interestingly, hardly anyone participating in that thread will even acknowledge this language, must less protest it. Even though some of them have defended censorship of such "offensive" language in the past, they sit silent now.

Since I am absolutely NOT offended by the word retarded, even when it is used as pejorative, I am very happy to know that the lefties that populate this forum, or at the very least have participated in that thread, have proven that they have zero regard for the silliness involved with the censorship of the word, do not believe the arguments against it's use and are not offended when it is used pejoratively. That's good, because I really like calling out people when they're acting retarded.

I also think it's perfectly ok to say someone is fat or call a slut a slut. Good to know the feminists here have no problem with that as well.

Of course I realize, that currently in our society, this language is currently socially unacceptable whether I agree with it or not. As such, I'm not in the habit of using it myself, especially in a forum such as this where many are likely to find it offensive. I'm quite frankly shocked at how few are bothered by it in the other thread.

Point of rant: Shame on everybody who has read the repeated slurs in that thread that normally would be "offended" by them but didn't speak up because of their feelings for the subject matter of the thread. When their "values" return at a later date, their hypocritical "opinions" won't mean a thing.

Where am I wrong on this?







[Edited 9/21/18 12:30pm]

So you started a thread and opened it with a lengthy post because you WEREN'T offended by the words used in a different thread but you ARE offended that nobody else took offense to it either? Do I have that right?

Many are not offended by the word but others that use the word want it both ways. Rodeo(aka mister name dropper, i got an autograph I'm friends) wanted to use the word but only in the instance of Alex Jones. Made the case you can't have it both ways. Rodeo needs a taste of him own medicine. To publically call for violence on others is out of line. The thread should have been fucking removed for that.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 09/21/18 3:59pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

So you started a thread and opened it with a lengthy post because you WEREN'T offended by the words used in a different thread but you ARE offended that nobody else took offense to it either? Do I have that right?


I am not offended by such language. I have debated people in this forum that were offended and/or argued for censorhip. Some of those same people do not seem at all offended when such language is applied to someone they despise.

The point of the thread is: Allowing an exception, any exception, invalidates the ludicrous arguments that some words should be completely off limits because of offense.

If you are not a person that condemns the use of such language... except when you hate the target, then I am not saying anything that you should find disagreeable.

[Edited 9/21/18 15:59pm]

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 09/21/18 4:00pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

SuperFurryAnimal said:

EmmaMcG said:

djThunderfunk said: So you started a thread and opened it with a lengthy post because you WEREN'T offended by the words used in a different thread but you ARE offended that nobody else took offense to it either? Do I have that right?

Many are not offended by the word but others that use the word want it both ways. Rodeo(aka mister name dropper, i got an autograph I'm friends) wanted to use the word but only in the instance of Alex Jones. Made the case you can't have it both ways. Rodeo needs a taste of him own medicine. To publically call for violence on others is out of line. The thread should have been fucking removed for that.



No, no, no! I hope not. I think in the future that thread will be the gift that keeps on giving. It's a gold mine.


We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 09/21/18 4:03pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

EmmaMcG said:

So you started a thread and opened it with a lengthy post because you WEREN'T offended by the words used in a different thread but you ARE offended that nobody else took offense to it either? Do I have that right?


I am not offended by such language. I have debated people in this forum that were offended and/or argued for censorhip. Some of those same people do not seem at all offended when such language is applied to someone they despise.

The point of the thread is: Allowing an exception, any exception, invalidates the ludicrous arguments that some words should be completely off limits because of offense.

If you are not a person that condemns the use of such language... except when you hate the target, then I am not saying anything that you should find disagreeable.

[Edited 9/21/18 15:59pm]

Yes and to also make threats towards a person even if they are a public figure is out of control.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 09/21/18 4:05pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

SuperFurryAnimal said:

Many are not offended by the word but others that use the word want it both ways. Rodeo(aka mister name dropper, i got an autograph I'm friends) wanted to use the word but only in the instance of Alex Jones. Made the case you can't have it both ways. Rodeo needs a taste of him own medicine. To publically call for violence on others is out of line. The thread should have been fucking removed for that.



No, no, no! I hope not. I think in the future that thread will be the gift that keeps on giving. It's a gold mine.


My general feeling is he is not wanting to meet Jones with a fist because he simply knows Jones carries a gun at all times. If he punches Jones in the face it would likely not end well. Anyhoo I don't even believe he is being sincere. Would probably name drop and talk to Jones.

Trump turns from 'humbling' grief to midterm fire and furry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 4 1234>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > "Offensive" language