New Testingstan

Maybe we wouldn't care if it didn't seem like every month you found a new word to be offended by that didn't bug you at all the month before.

brb, looking in the etymological dictionary if I can get offended over 'bug'

evilsoup wrote:brb, looking in the etymological dictionary if I can get offended over 'bug'

Poe's law.

Chambers Dictionary of Etymology wrote: --v. Slang [...] 2 annoy, irritate. 1949, American English, probably originally in allusion to insect pests.

Damnit.

I suppose you could go with the angle that it's insulting to insects.

would that make men in black a hate crime?

Those insects clearly struck first. MIB's actions were self defense and i'm sticking to that.

Zod wrote:Maybe we wouldn't care if it didn't seem like every month you found a new word to be offended by that didn't bug you at all the month before.

nah pretty sure you'd always find something to whine about

i'll even admit that enforcement has been lax but my opinion of misogyny, racism, ableism, etc has always been pretty explicit and feigning ignorance doesn't make you look any better

even so, here's a tip: when told "you're using an offensive term/slur and should stop doing it," the appropriate response is "my bad, i'll cut it out," and not "FUCK YOU DAD I DO WHAT I WANT"

Losonti Tokash wrote:

Zod wrote:Maybe we wouldn't care if it didn't seem like every month you found a new word to be offended by that didn't bug you at all the month before.

nah pretty sure you'd always find something to whine about

i'll even admit that enforcement has been lax but my opinion of misogyny, racism, ableism, etc has always been pretty explicit and feigning ignorance doesn't make you look any better

even so, here's a tip: when told "you're using an offensive term/slur and should stop doing it," the appropriate response is "my bad, i'll cut it out," and not "FUCK YOU DAD I DO WHAT I WANT"

Unless its completely unreasonable. Which complaining about "bitching" clearly is.

No, it isn't.

Losonti Tokash wrote:No, it isn't.

Dude stop. Just fucking stop. It's literally to the point of farce.

You seem to be under the impression that you, as a man, are able to dictate to women what they're allowed to be offended by. This is obviously incorrect!

Losonti Tokash wrote:You seem to be under the impression that you, as a man, are able to dictate to women what they're allowed to be offended by. This is obviously incorrect!

You seem to be under the impression that anyone should care if someone is thin skinned enough to be offended by neutral words not aimed at any group. You are not the thought police.

Losonti Tokash wrote:You seem to be under the impression that you, as a man, are able to dictate to women what they're allowed to be offended by. This is obviously incorrect!

Isn't that what you're doing right now? You're arguing that certain word should always be considered offensive to women if a man uses them.

Zod wrote:

Losonti Tokash wrote:You seem to be under the impression that you, as a man, are able to dictate to women what they're allowed to be offended by. This is obviously incorrect!

Isn't that what you're doing right now? You're arguing that certain word should always be considered offensive to women if a man uses them.

Not really what he's saying. He's saying that because extremely thin skinned individuals may be offended, some things, even if they are totally harmless, should never be said. I disagree.

Flagg wrote:

Losonti Tokash wrote:You seem to be under the impression that you, as a man, are able to dictate to women what they're allowed to be offended by. This is obviously incorrect!

You seem to be under the impression that anyone should care if someone is thin skinned enough to be offended by neutral words not aimed at any group. You are not the thought police.

Maybe if that was actually what was happening and you were being punished for your thoughts, you'd have a point. Since neither of those things are what's happening, though, I can only conclude you're trolling yet again.

Zod wrote:

Losonti Tokash wrote:You seem to be under the impression that you, as a man, are able to dictate to women what they're allowed to be offended by. This is obviously incorrect!

Isn't that what you're doing right now? You're arguing that certain word should always be considered offensive to women if a man uses them.

A grievous injury to my cause! Oh wait, it's something posters have complained about many times in the past and you're concern trolling yet again.

Except just this once I'm not actually trolling. And given your using word filters to censor words you dislike why wouldn't I assume the next word to be verboten would get the same treatment?

Losonti Tokash wrote:
A grievous injury to my cause! Oh wait, it's something posters have complained about many times in the past and you're concern trolling yet again.

If I need to be blunt about it, I'm calling you a whiny hypocritical cunt.

Zod wrote:

Losonti Tokash wrote:
A grievous injury to my cause! Oh wait, it's something posters have complained about many times in the past and you're concern trolling yet again.

If I need to be blunt about it, I'm calling you a whiny hypocritical cunt.

Stupid shit like that is why I question myself whenever we end up on the same side of an argument.

just like it's the thought that counts with gifts, it isn't even the word itself that is the real problem here. it is the attitude toward other ppl

when somebody says "please stop that" and you instead do it even moar what you're saying is "I don't care how you feel"

and that hurts directly and moreover enables more badness down the line. so your response to "plz don't say cunt" is "grow a thick skin, cunt". what if it was a physical attack? would you say "learn to fight better, you pussy?"

well you might say "but that's different". I don't think it really is, hurting someone through words or through fists is hurting someone and you should cut it out when that becomes clear

but even if you disagree - if you refuse to see the harm in words while being willing to do something about fists - how will the victim feel when he or she was met with uncaring or hatred before? s/he might, looking at past experiences, decide "I don't want to add insult to injury" and not even take his or her concerns to someone else for help

and surely you all can agree that isn't a desirable outcome



i'm sure you're thinking "this is an internet forum who really cares" but you've gotta understand that there are real people actually affected by this shit, even on an internet forum (including some good members who have left as a result of this atmosphere), and secondly if you keep this same kind of attitude irl it will hurt there too. and that's why we ask you to consider this stuff

So how many people do you think are offended by bronies out there?

You'd have a point if this wasn't just a case of people using any excuse for faux offense to attack people they don't like.

Flagg wrote:You'd have a point if this wasn't just a case of people using any excuse for faux offense to attack people they don't like.

Total bullshit and you know it.

Losonti Tokash wrote:

Flagg wrote:You'd have a point if this wasn't just a case of people using any excuse for faux offense to attack people they don't like.

Total bullshit and you know it.

Is it?

I'm not really sure what's going on here, but it seems like this could easily be solved by just throwing Flagg onto your enemies list. I put him in there months ago and it greatly increased my browsing experience.