04 Aug 2020, 11:41 am
Mountain Goat wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
...
ME: Bats aren't birds.
HE: But they's gots wings, eats bugs, and fly! They's birds, man! They's birds!!
ME:
... Please tell me this is not a conversation that actually took place.
I wish I could. The man was looking for bats' nests ... to steal their eggs ... to hatch them and train the fledgling bats to hunt ...Fnord wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
... Honestly I wonder if some people are really incapable of getting things.
To take the idea even further: I wonder if everyone is incapable of understanding something...ME: Bats aren't birds.
HE: But they's gots wings, eats bugs, and fly! They's birds, man! They's birds!!
ME:
My Dad would go up to talk to anyone. He was tallented like that. At a local beach he saw an elderly lady looking for something, so he asked "What are you looking for?"
"Cockles" she replied.
My dad said they are under the sand, and he walked to an area that had the tell tale signs, and with his walking stick he dug one up.
She said "That's not a cockle. That's a shell".
My Dad explained to her there was a cockle inside it and if you boiled them in a saucepan, when the creature dies, it will open its shell and you can eat it.
She was having none of that and the usual thing was said "I have lived in London for "X" years (Could not recall the number of years her age was but she was past retirement age)" (You know the story of how people don't like being wrong and try to make themselves seem knowledgeable and important).
My Dad said something like "You have lived in this country for all those years and expected to see ready cooked cockles sitting on the sand?"
It makes one wonder how someone can live for so long and not know basic things. At least she found the right beach, we shall give her that!
Reminds me when my ex thought avocados were not fruit. He thought they were a guacamole. Technically you do make guacamole from avocados. So he was right about that there when he said it was a guacamole. But they are a fruit. You use that fruit to make the dip.
My ex would argue over stupid s**t when he can just get on his damn computer and look it up so he wouldn't look stupid. I was the one to look it up to show him a page that said they are a fruit because he wouldn't drop it.
Plus I hate people who pretend they know everything without getting that information. They just pulled it out of their ass. I would be fine if they just said it was their opinion or their speculation but them treating it like a fact is what gets me. Both my ex's did it.
04 Aug 2020, 2:21 pm
funeralxempire wrote:
jimmy m wrote:
Feyokien wrote:
If you google 'white supremacy', the definition is as follows:
I wont make any claims to the character of other members, but funeralxempires definition is valid interpretation. It is an expansion of the phrase 'dominate society'.
I wont make any claims to the character of other members, but funeralxempires definition is valid interpretation. It is an expansion of the phrase 'dominate society'.
funeralxempires wrote "If someone consistently puts the interests and concerns of white people ahead of those of other people is it unfair to refer to that person as a white supremacist when they meet the definition?"
Those are different definitions. funeralxempires definition has nothing to do with the interpretation that one race is better or superior to another race.
The definition of prejudice is "an unfair feeling of dislike for a person or group because of race, sex, religion, etc. : a feeling of like or dislike for someone or something especially when it is not reasonable or logical." He has redefined prejudiced into white supremacists.
If funeralxempires refers to another member as a white supremacist then he applying a derogatory term against another member.
You seem to be under the impression that one can only be a white supremacist if they preach some sort of 'master race' nonsense and basing all of your conclusions on that overly strict definition.
When you state that Jimmy is basing his conclusion on some sort of master race 'nonsense' ~ it is an interesting statement given that you previously stated:
funeralxempire wrote:
Should we not refer to a poster who consistently puts the interests and concerns of white people ahead of others, or who consistently denigrates or is hostile to the interests and concerns of PoC by the term used to describe such people?
I thought we were supposed to be in favour of speaking the truth plainly.
I thought we were supposed to be in favour of speaking the truth plainly.
Yet you have not plainly stated what makes sense to you.
You seem to be referring to the master race 'nonsense' as being in the master and servant sense such as involving slavery, rather than in the sense of a master who is considered before others on account of sex, age and experience ~ as in terms of being more in control of themselves, hence the derogation on account that some believe that light skinned cultures are more civilised or advanced than dark skinned cultures and vice-versa ~ because of not linguistically understanding or behaviourally appreciating each other's historical traditions or developmental innovations.
funeralxempire wrote:
Sorry Jimmy, but imma keep calling a spade a spade. You can gnash your teeth over it all you like but you don't get to silence me on this matter.
Stick as you state to calling a 'spade a spade' (i.e., as being here reading what is written) rather than imagining the intentions of the digger (you) and undermining yourself by way of entrenching others in your fantasised interactions (teeth gnashing and silencing you). The [psychological] map is not as such the [physiological] territory! The only thing stopping your freedom of speech is your failure to abide by it in terms of respecting other peoples sense and sensibilities ~ recalling or considering anew that the freedom of speech is like having a driving license and abiding by the highway code ~ so drop the imagined wrong doings of yourself in other's positions, and pick up on the subject matter of the discussion itself (as being to make the future of Wrong Planet better) instead, and no longer break the following rule:
2. Personal attacks.
This includes insinuation, ridicule and personal insults, regardless of whether direct or indirect. Attacking an opinion, belief or philosophy is acceptable, but attacking the person making the comments is not.
Your compliance is very much appreciated as it is universally required. Thankyou everyone.
_________________
I reserve the right or is it left to at very least be wrong
04 Aug 2020, 2:30 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:31 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:37 pm
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
04 Aug 2020, 2:39 pm
Deepthought 7 wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
jimmy m wrote:
Feyokien wrote:
If you google 'white supremacy', the definition is as follows:
I wont make any claims to the character of other members, but funeralxempires definition is valid interpretation. It is an expansion of the phrase 'dominate society'.
I wont make any claims to the character of other members, but funeralxempires definition is valid interpretation. It is an expansion of the phrase 'dominate society'.
funeralxempires wrote "If someone consistently puts the interests and concerns of white people ahead of those of other people is it unfair to refer to that person as a white supremacist when they meet the definition?"
Those are different definitions. funeralxempires definition has nothing to do with the interpretation that one race is better or superior to another race.
The definition of prejudice is "an unfair feeling of dislike for a person or group because of race, sex, religion, etc. : a feeling of like or dislike for someone or something especially when it is not reasonable or logical." He has redefined prejudiced into white supremacists.
If funeralxempires refers to another member as a white supremacist then he applying a derogatory term against another member.
You seem to be under the impression that one can only be a white supremacist if they preach some sort of 'master race' nonsense and basing all of your conclusions on that overly strict definition.
When you state that Jimmy is basing his conclusion on some sort of master race 'nonsense' ~ it is an interesting statement given that you previously stated:
funeralxempire wrote:
Should we not refer to a poster who consistently puts the interests and concerns of white people ahead of others, or who consistently denigrates or is hostile to the interests and concerns of PoC by the term used to describe such people?
I thought we were supposed to be in favour of speaking the truth plainly.
I thought we were supposed to be in favour of speaking the truth plainly.
Yet you have not plainly stated what makes sense to you.
You seem to be referring to the master race 'nonsense' as being in the master and servant sense such as involving slavery, rather than in the sense of a master who is considered before others on account of sex, age and experience ~ as in terms of being more in control of themselves, hence the derogation on account that some believe that light skinned cultures are more civilised or advanced than dark skinned cultures and vice-versa ~ because of not linguistically understanding or behaviourally appreciating each other's historical traditions or developmental innovations.
[quote="funeralxempire.
Stick as you state to calling a 'spade a spade' (i.e., as being here reading what is written) rather than imagining the intentions of the digger (you) and undermining yourself by way of entrenching others in your fantasised interactions (teeth gnashing and silencing you). The [psychological] map is not as such the [physiological] territory! The only thing stopping your freedom of speech is your failure to abide by it in terms of respecting other peoples sense and sensibilities ~ recalling or considering anew that the freedom of speech is like having a driving license and abiding by the highway code ~ so drop the imagined wrong doings of yourself in other's positions, and pick up on the subject matter of the discussion itself (as being to make the future of Wrong Planet better) instead, and no longer break the following rule:
2. Personal attacks.
This includes insinuation, ridicule and personal insults, regardless of whether direct or indirect. Attacking an opinion, belief or philosophy is acceptable, but attacking the person making the comments is not.
Your compliance is very much appreciated as it is universally required. Thankyou everyone.
[/quote]If calling out racism is a bannable offence I will have to accept that outcome. Until then, I'll keep calling it as I see it. . Feel free to report me as much as you feel the need to.
Last edited by envirozentinel on 04 Aug 2020, 3:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.: personal attack excised
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
04 Aug 2020, 2:43 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:44 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:46 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:47 pm
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder
04 Aug 2020, 2:51 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:51 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:56 pm
04 Aug 2020, 2:59 pm
04 Aug 2020, 3:01 pm
04 Aug 2020, 3:05 pm
