He's doing it again there BTW. By saying that we interpret the Bible in a certain way so that we don't upset certain friends, he's defining our world view for us.
He's doing it again there BTW. By saying that we interpret the Bible in a certain way so that we don't upset certain friends, he's defining our world view for us.
Yeah, it's that difference between just wanting to be non-condemnatory (which isn't exactly bad in itself, but has limits: "Hi, I feed my employees through wood chippers. " "That's great, not for me to judge".) with taking acquaintances' lived experiences into account.
that is no excuse for the generalised labelling implied by the term victim culture.
I'm sorry you don't like the term; it's the best name I've found so far for the particular wrong direction in which I see western culture going.
What alternative term do you recommend ?
We need names for phenomena in order to discuss them.
You're not the sort of person I'd expect to advocate the neo-Orwellian project of preventing a point of view being expressed by criminalizing the available words....
OK, you lot realise his goal isn't really discussion, right? I mean, cross his bridge if you want, but what you say doesn't matter. It is the sound of your hooves on its deck that feeds him.
It's not that Russ is a troll; it's that Russ is an asshole whose vampiric pleasure from instigating nausea in others makes regular trolls cringe in horrific aversion. One assumes that Russ has some sort of neurological condition prompting this.
It's not that Russ is a troll; it's that Russ is an asshole whose vampiric pleasure from instigating nausea in others makes regular trolls cringe in horrific aversion. One assumes that Russ has some sort of neurological condition prompting this.
OK, you lot realise his goal isn't really discussion, right? I mean, cross his bridge if you want, but what you say doesn't matter. It is the sound of your hooves on its deck that feeds him.
My goal was to take the distraction away from the Purgatory thread, so it could be discussed, if necessary, but somewhere else.
OK, you lot realise his goal isn't really discussion, right? I mean, cross his bridge if you want, but what you say doesn't matter. It is the sound of your hooves on its deck that feeds him.
My goal was to take the distraction away from the Purgatory thread, so it could be discussed, if necessary, but somewhere else.
Russ' history shows that he will happily twist both threads.
@Russ seems to be reviving his idiosyncratic concept of a tolerance gap on the Purgatory Polyamory thread, previously discussed on the mega Hell thread from 2015 (link). He first mentioned a tolerance gap on page 3 of that thread and somewhere described it as:
a tolerance gap between what we advocate and what we condemn
The last time this came up, I was pretty sure it was another way of weaselling in prejudice and discrimination through redefinition of terminology. From the responses on the Purgatory Polyamory thread I think the use of tolerance was reminding others that Russ might be using the word in his own idiosyncratic way.
Whereas the conservative narrative might be that we know from the Good Old Days that the real incidence of serious gender dysphoria (those who can't just pull their socks up and get over it) is tiny, and the 1% figure represents "social contagion", attention-seeking behaviour and fake statistics.
The bit you quoted one half of is caricaturing progressive and conservative positions, with the usual implication that people of goodwill ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere.
You're not someone I'd normally associate with the self-righteous belief that the progressive narrative is the only morally permissible one...
Or someone I'd expect to accuse me of being unfair to conservatives...
Looks like the dwindling interest in estimating the statistical criminality of Mexicans [sic] has Russ looking for another party/thread to crash. Next Russ will explain that if you DON'T believe that some trans folks aren't really trans and DON'T insult them by using the wrong pronouns, you're prejudiced.
Ah - yes. Earth round or flat? Scientific community say it's round; flat earthers say it's flat. People of good will ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere.
Conservatives want to keep black people as slaves. Progressives want to keep nobody as slaves. People of good will ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere and only keep half the black people as slaves.
Treat trans people with respect? Treat them like aberrations? Ooh, let me try and work out where the 'middle ground' is where we can meet harmoniously.
The bit you quoted one half of is caricaturing progressive and conservative positions, with the usual implication that people of goodwill ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere.
You're not someone I'd normally associate with the self-righteous belief that the progressive narrative is the only morally permissible one...
Or someone I'd expect to accuse me of being unfair to conservatives...
I reckon @lilbuddha is right about the trolling tendencies. Everything currently posted is calculated to inflame.
He's doing that thing where he repeats things other people say to him and accuses others of doing it.
So he makes up some nonsense phrase - then accuses others of making up shit.
Or he comes up with some complicated, insane, illogical philosophical justification, and then accuses others of sophistry.
He's literally read a pocket handbook to Kant and then pretends that he knows something about Kant. But won't actually answer any questions about Kant.
Because he doesn't actually know any Kant
He's a dick. Why anyone continues to play his games, I have no idea.
Most forum arguments are self-exculpatory, but ISTM that his conduct in both the threads under discussion are a fairly naked exercise in attempting to finding justification for a particular type of behavior.
So not sure why anyone would continue to engage him and expect otherwise.
I reckon @lilbuddha is right about the trolling tendencies. Everything currently posted is calculated to inflame.
Previously, he played a better game. He would post in the manner of one's racist grandparent; appearing well-meaning but still saying nasty things. But he doesn't need to go to that effort as any old rubbish will still work as bait.
It's the internet. People accept trolling as long as it's not abusive, and it provides a kind of intellectual puzzle, although it becomes tedious. Although on the transgender thread, he posted obvious rubbish, like he didn't care.
Trolling is easy to decode from a RL parallel: read the post. Consider the likely response from persons who would disagree with the remark in a pub approaching closing time. If the response would not be violent, then it isn't trolling.
The victims of his trolling would almost certainly get violent - the transgender people trashed above, the homosexuals equated with paedophiles on the Pope Francis thread, the Romanies, Mexicans and the rest of the minorities he's tried, and failed, to prove his point that racism is acceptable on the Victim Culture thread. However, I am sure Russ could find mates down the pub to cheer him along.
The victims of his trolling would almost certainly get violent - the transgender people trashed above, the homosexuals equated with paedophiles on the Pope Francis thread, the Romanies, Mexicans and the rest of the minorities he's tried, and failed, to prove his point that racism is acceptable on the Victim Culture thread. However, I am sure Russ could find mates down the pub to cheer him along.
I am sure he could, but it wouldn't be long before he insulted a group some of his erstwhile supporters identify with. The result would be the same.
Ah - yes. Earth round or flat? Scientific community say it's round; flat earthers say it's flat. People of good will ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere.
New York City? Grab some fresh "everything" bagels and schmear? Or maybe some bialys (/bialies?), since they're flatish bagelish things. Roundish and flatish!
If you are not actually a racist and an anti-Semite, you are certainly an apologist for racist and anti-Semitic behaviours.
If that's not bad enough, your "argument" is so full of utter bullshit that you literally think it is reasonable to say that disadvantaging Black people is the same as locking a park gate at night.
Somehow inside your tiny mind, these two things are equivalent.
No, no, I get it Russ. I really do. It must be so hard living alone in the 19 century whilst all these upstarts (gays, ethnic minorities, disabled people, Jews, etc) come along and invade your space with their annoying claims to want to be treated like humans.
It must really stick in your gullet when women demand to have rights. Because why can't they just do what men do? Why do they have to have special rules and protections?
It must really annoy you when black people get to university. They've not got the best grades! They've not learned sufficient Latin grammar! And yet here they are, studying as if they own the place - pushing out those who deserve the spot (from their extensive and expensive education at the best schools). I mean, it is almost like they've actually been disadvantaged and have never had the privilege of expensive school education, isn't it Russ.
Comments
Yeah, it's that difference between just wanting to be non-condemnatory (which isn't exactly bad in itself, but has limits: "Hi, I feed my employees through wood chippers. " "That's great, not for me to judge".) with taking acquaintances' lived experiences into account.
Yes - my bad. Apologies.
That's much too kind.
He has no condition other than being a tosspot.
My goal was to take the distraction away from the Purgatory thread, so it could be discussed, if necessary, but somewhere else.
No, you utter tool. The criteria is that when man and women tennis players make the same infringement the get the same punishment.
You are literally arguing that women tennis players should be treated differently (worse) to men.
Standard ConEvo practice. You must tolerate intolerance. Well, our intolerance, 'cos it's what the Good Book says.
The bullshit is most because Russ is a dick and only tangentially because of an affiliation with Con Evos.
The bit you quoted one half of is caricaturing progressive and conservative positions, with the usual implication that people of goodwill ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere.
You're not someone I'd normally associate with the self-righteous belief that the progressive narrative is the only morally permissible one...
Or someone I'd expect to accuse me of being unfair to conservatives...
Conservatives want to keep black people as slaves. Progressives want to keep nobody as slaves. People of good will ought to be able to meet in the middle somewhere and only keep half the black people as slaves.
It's like being acceptably racist.
You are a cock, Socrates.
It's also a logical fallacy called the strawman.
AFF
Stuck that one on the quotes file...
Is that what you call that orifice?
He's doing that thing where he repeats things other people say to him and accuses others of doing it.
So he makes up some nonsense phrase - then accuses others of making up shit.
Or he comes up with some complicated, insane, illogical philosophical justification, and then accuses others of sophistry.
He's literally read a pocket handbook to Kant and then pretends that he knows something about Kant. But won't actually answer any questions about Kant.
Because he doesn't actually know any Kant
He's a dick. Why anyone continues to play his games, I have no idea.
So not sure why anyone would continue to engage him and expect otherwise.
This.
I am sure he could, but it wouldn't be long before he insulted a group some of his erstwhile supporters identify with. The result would be the same.
New York City? Grab some fresh "everything" bagels and schmear? Or maybe some bialys (/bialies?), since they're flatish bagelish things. Roundish and flatish!
I'm not sure very much has. Most of our horses are dead.
Welcome back, though. Really lovely to see you.
If you are not actually a racist and an anti-Semite, you are certainly an apologist for racist and anti-Semitic behaviours.
If that's not bad enough, your "argument" is so full of utter bullshit that you literally think it is reasonable to say that disadvantaging Black people is the same as locking a park gate at night.
Somehow inside your tiny mind, these two things are equivalent.
No, no, I get it Russ. I really do. It must be so hard living alone in the 19 century whilst all these upstarts (gays, ethnic minorities, disabled people, Jews, etc) come along and invade your space with their annoying claims to want to be treated like humans.
It must really stick in your gullet when women demand to have rights. Because why can't they just do what men do? Why do they have to have special rules and protections?
It must really annoy you when black people get to university. They've not got the best grades! They've not learned sufficient Latin grammar! And yet here they are, studying as if they own the place - pushing out those who deserve the spot (from their extensive and expensive education at the best schools). I mean, it is almost like they've actually been disadvantaged and have never had the privilege of expensive school education, isn't it Russ.