Teenage Wildlife

IMPORTANT: Use your registry nickname as your username when logging in to Conversation Piece!


Free for All
   >> A Crack in the Past
Thread views: 2458 Previous threadView all threadsNext threadFlat Mode*

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/21/11 12:44 PM
Re: I am a Racist (03/02) [re: Auntie Prism] Reply to this post

WildWind: [From a "sacred cow" to a "dead fish." Lovely]: eraserhead, you have a bad habit of selectively responding to arguments as they suit you. As with the last debate we had, many of the things you've argued have already been answered in either my or twister's posts; I could just quote things I've already said to respond to you. In fact, I will, when I get there. I will italicise the quotations that are from my own post for convenience in figuring out who said what.

In reply to:

I am a minority of one. I have absolutely nothing in common with most Swedes.


The fact that you behave or believe differently does not make you a minority for the context of this discussion. Racism is about judgments on how you look or where you (originally) come from. It's about judging people on the basis of things they can't choose, and which probably have little influence on the way they behave or the things they believe (things which, by the way, people do choose). Out of curiosity, what is the percentage of minorities in Sweden anyway?

In reply to:

WildWind says she takes offense to SnowChild's post, but WW didn't say anything against power2charm nor Emil.


I said in my previous post:

In reply to:

I take offense to this, as I as well as Trash, FiGgU_, Tati_wl and EuropeanCanon all indicated that we disagreed with the expressed sentiment. Some were done with sarcasm, some were explicit.

As far as the tone, I can only speak for myself in explaining why I made the short post that I did rather than exploding in an angry ball of hell fire. It's because racism primarily makes me sad. My initial reaction was sadness, and the best way I knew to express it was by saying what I said. I also know power2charm well enough to know that an angry ball of hell fire will only egg him on.


To put it simply, I did speak out against p2c's post. It apparently wasn't to your satisfaction, but it's pretty arrogant of you to be the self-appointed judge of which disagreements are vehement enough. I explained why I did not post a more "angry" response. Keep in mind that it's also a very personal issue for me, as I can often be found conversing in public in Spanish with my family. Though one response to that might be to get more angry, another might be a desire to stay distant. That's mine, as I tend not to be a person who likes to post her personal details all over the board.

In regard to your "sacred cow" theory in specific reference to this thread, even if p2c were a "sacred cow" at one time, I submit that there's no reason he would be any longer. He hardly posts anymore, and most of the new users probably don't know even who he is.

Though I did speak out, possible reasons other than your sacred cow theory that one might not have responded to p2c include:

* Finding the post so offensive that it doesn't deserve response
* A desire to not keep those words at the top of the board
* A desire not to get involved in a discussion that will surely turn into a flame war
* A knowledge that angry responses often add fuel to p2c's fire.

Finally, I find your choice of "sacred cows" to single out curious. There are plenty of regular users that didn't respond to this post, yet you're not jumping down their throats. Are you just singling out the "sacred cows" with whom you disagree much of the time, that is, the ones that aren't your sacred cows? I'll get more into that in a minute.

In reply to:

When was the last time you saw a member of the in-crowd criticize another member of the in-crowd?


Since you've made it abundantly clear that you consider twister and me members of the "in crowd" that are beyond each other's reproach, I'll point you to this post, and this one, and another and one more, in which twister and I have disagreed with each other on issues of varying importance.

In reply to:

But WildWind and twister, why don't you turn your attention from me and instead turn your attention to Snowchild's post


I read it, eraserhead, and I agreed with it, except for her assertion that no one had challenged p2c. You did notice, I hope, that I didn't challenge anything she said other than that one point. I saw no further reason for comment, given that I agreed with her. I don't understand why you're trying to preach to the converted.

As far as "focusing my attention on you," I'm sorry, eraserhead, but you've brought this on yourself as citing me as an example of a behavior you apparently find reprehensible.

In reply to:

I never posted to the "Favourite TWers" thread. I don't make those kinds of lists. Last week I did mention a few names of people I like, and those people are all "one of a kind"


These two comments completely contradict each other. "I don't make those kinds of lists, but last week I did"? Huh? The fact that you try to justify it by saying that the people you listed are "different" just means that you have different sacred cow criteria, not that you don't have sacred cows of your own.

And for the record, I don't generally post to "Favorite TWer" threads either. In my entire history here I believe I've made one tongue-in-cheek post to extol the virtues of Dara, who had not yet been mentioned and certainly deserves a nod of his own; I made another post to mention Evan, who had not yet been mentioned and who is responsible for this board's existence; and I made one post to give a special nod to the people I've actually met in person, and I hope you can see the distinction between that and a "sacred cow."

In reply to:

I don't have "sacred cows" of my own.


OK, then why have you never disagreed with Adam, for example? And "because he always has good things to say" is not an acceptable response, because you have repeatedly asserted that people don't agree with "sacred cows" because they're right, but by virtue of the fact that they're "sacred cows." You've taken away my right to agree with someone on his or her own merits, and you've taken away anyone else's right to agree with me on my own merits. Given that Adam certainly meets the "sacred cow" criteria you've put forth, I think that if my times of agreement are up for scrutiny, yours should most certainly be also.

Note that I'm not trying to take anything away from Adam here, as I too believe he's a fine poster, I just think you should apply your presumptions to yourself as well as to everyone else.

In reply to:

So there's no possibility that these people actually agreed with what I had to say?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly, but I doubt it. twister and you have formed a nice little alliance which makes it hard for anyone to disagree with twister or you, seeing as you're the two toughest debaters around.


This would be laughable if it weren't so offensive to my and twister's integrity. There are not words to describe how arrogant your presumption of my motives is. twister and I happen to have the same beliefs about a lot of things. If we had a friendship or an "alliance" as you call it, it would be because we happen to view many things the same way, not the other way around. And I say if because I talk to him off the board about as often as I talk to you.

It's not hard to disagree with us, though it may be hard to continually advance a disagreement because we usually advance a number of sane, rational arguments in defense of our position, whereas most people just knee-jerk react. I'd also suggest that if it's hard to disagree with us when we agree with each other it's because we're usually right (and of course we believe we're right when we're defending our positions or we wouldn't defend them). The fact that we're two "tough debaters" who share a number of opinions is hardly evidence of your belief that we've formed a conspiracy against everyone else.

As far as your doubting that people sometimes agree with me because they happen to agree with me, that is offensive to me personally, as if no one could ever possibly think my positions are tenable without the "sacred cow" factor.

Again, I've addressed this in my previous post, advancing a question that you've not yet answered:

In reply to:

These people weren't defending me, they were offering arguments in defense of my opinion, which I and apparently others believe is correct. For Heaven's sake, eraserhead, is every agreement with a well-known poster a result of their being a "sacred cow"? Or is it just every agreement with a well-known poster that doesn't agree with you?


In reply to:

[twister] You really think the masses, including myself, are incapable of independant thought and flock in when someone they like is disagreed with immediately to defend them? That just ain't true, eraserhead.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, as you can see, both Ruskie and PHOENIX (and I) disagree with you. Troughout history, the masses have shown that they are incapable of independant thought and flock in when someone they like is disagreed with immediately to defend them. That's the mob mentality.


In general, I would argue that coming to the defense of someone you like is friendship, not mob mentality. If someone calls my sister an abrasive weirdo, of course I am going to defend her. That is part of my role as someone close to her. And this response is assuming that I concede everything you've said about people constantly running to the defense of "sacred cows," which I certainly haven't.

The fact that I've pointed out that, for example, twister and I are not always in agreement proves that there is no "mob mentality" here. I disagreed with p2c in this post and I have disagreed with him before. And once again, I take offense that you believe that I am incapable of evaluating an argument on its own mertis, that my choices of arguments are driven solely by some construct that you've invented.

In reply to:

As I've said, most people are idiots. Of course, they're not idiots forever. It's up to them. You don't have to be a dead fish if you don't want to.


You seem to be suggesting that I am both an idiot and a "dead fish," whatever that means. I think that my history speaks for itself in this regard.

WildWind: [There in black and white]:

In reply to:

by the way, WW, Einar was right, they completely destroyed the song


Oh, you're so wrong! What it did was add a new dimension that allowed the listener to hear the song in a very new, very rich way. I just love that version. I think all of you that hate it are depriving yourselves.

And eraserhead, I think that the two posts twister and I have just made, which we were apparently composing simultaneously (his was new to me when I submitted mine), are further evidence of a lack of this so-called conspiracy. In addition to the fact that we're taking completely different approaches to this argument, he seems to be defending p2c's original post, which I most certainly am not.

ohramona: [Please pardon the interruption…]:

In reply to:

If someone calls my sister an abrasive weirdo, of course I am going to defend her.


Ah, but my sister is an abrasive weirdo!


...we now return you to the developing dissertations of WW, Twister, et al.

eraserhead:

In reply to:

[twister] ...And that you, and an elite few alone, are somehow better than that?


We are all on different spiritual levels. We shouldn't deny the fact that some people have reached a higher level of spirituality than other people. So many people don't even believe in the soul, they don't even think we have a soul. They're more interested in the stock market. Most people eat animals because they like the taste in their mouth. As long as the masses continue to kill each other and other beings on this earth, as long as they're more interested in gaining more power, getting bigger houses and more cars, I think they're idiots, more or less. All the men who treat their women like trash, they're not very good men. So many women have never been told how beautiful they are, they never get to hear anything nice. Just watch Ricki Lake and you get a pretty good picture of our situation on planet Earth today. While billions of people starve, the spoiled, white people in the West are busy harassing each other to death. I am definitely above that. So, yeah, some people are "better" than other people because you are your thoughts, basically; you are what you do. If your head is full of greed and hate, if you treat other people like dirt, then you're not a very good person. I'm not talking about twister or WW or anyone else here, I'm just saying that it's not wrong to admit that some people are more spiritually advanced than other people.

In reply to:

[WildWind] Out of curiosity, what is the percentage of minorities in Sweden anyway?


I don't know, but we sure have a lot of immigrants here and I welcome them all. It's good for them to come here because Sweden is a rich country in many ways and it's good for us Swedes to meet different cultures because I think the meaning of life is basically to learn. I'd like to see even more immigrants here, more people of different "races" and cultures. They say Swedish women are so pretty, yeah, maybe, but they're nothing like African, Turkish, Iranian, Italian, Brazilian, Yugoslavian (and so on) women. :)

In reply to:

Though I did speak out, possible reasons other than your sacred cow theory that one might not have responded to p2c include:

* Finding the post so offensive that it doesn't deserve response
* A desire to not keep those words at the top of the board
* A desire not to get involved in a discussion that will surely turn into a flame war
* A knowledge that angry responses often add fuel to p2c's fire.


Okay. Good points.

In reply to:

There are plenty of regular users that didn't respond to this post, yet you're not jumping down their throats. Are you just singling out the "sacred cows" with whom you disagree much of the time, that is, the ones that aren't your sacred cows?


No, I criticized the regular users/the big names who already had posted to this thread. I criticized you (WW), twister, Emil and dice. You had already posted to this thread, and I was dissapointed with your replies. I think you WW could have praised Snowchild's intelligent post instead of finding something wrong with it. So there was one statement in her post you disagreed with, and, according to what you're saying now, the rest of the post was really good, in your opinion. Why didn't you say so then? If you had expressed your support for Snowchild and her arguments more clearly, I wouldn't have criticized you. It just seems weird that p2c proudly can announce "I am a racist" without you getting upset, and then when Snowchild tears his silly post apart, and express concern for the fact that people don't react, you choose to criticize her. Even if you do disagree with one statement in her thread, couldn't you just have forgotten about that and instead concentrated on answering p2c?

Anyway, about the other regulars...
twister has said he agrees with p2c, and so does dice, so of course I'm critical of them. I can't really criticize Evan for not jumping in here. Adam is the moderator, which means he has to bite his tongue sometimes, I guess. Or maybe I'm wrong about that. But you can't really expect the moderator to choose sides in every debate.

In reply to:

I don't understand why you're trying to preach to the converted.


Okay, I believe you: you agree with Snowchild's post. That's fine. So I guess you're not an example of a regular who takes
sides with another regular (just because he/she is a regular) against someone who is not part of the in-crowd. But why does twister still agree with p2c, why does he neglect Snowchild's post? What do you think?

In reply to:

You've taken away my right to agree with someone on his or her own merits, and you've taken away anyone else's right to agree with me on my own merits.


I think I've said this before, but I can repeat it: I am not God. I'm just a 21 year old guy with a lot of thoughts.

In reply to:

OK, then why have you never disagreed with Adam, for example? And "because he always has good things to say" is not an acceptable response, because you have repeatedly asserted that people don't agree with "sacred cows" because they're right, but by virtue of the fact that they're "sacred cows."


A long time ago, I had a real disagreement with Dara. I admit that I was wrong, but the point here is that I had a disagreement with one of the most admired and well-liked TWers. At that time, he was one of my favourites, and he still is. Some months ago I had a disagreement with rubleem, it wasn't that serious, though he never replied to my last message, so maybe it was serious after all. :) Also, I remember that I had a heated discussion with Alice_Falls several months ago. Me and Kirk had a heated discussion about money and taxes last year. We strongly disagreed, and Kirk is, in my opinion, the most thought-provoking poster here. I think Marquis and I have very different views on drugs, so there's another disagreement. We've never really debated because in 90% of the cases that's meaningless. I don't remember if I've strongly disagreed with Adam or not. I don't think that's relevant. I've disagreed with many other posters who I respect and admire a lot. But they are not my sacred cows, because I can criticize them. I think I've disagreed with most of the big names on this board. Dara, rubleem, Alice, WildWind, twister, Einar, and Kirk are just some examples.

In reply to:

As far as your doubting that people sometimes agree with me because they happen to agree with me, that is offensive to me personally, as if no one could ever possibly think my positions are tenable without the "sacred cow" factor.


I don't doubt that people sometimes agree with you, but you're a woman of steel, a woman with great authority, and I think, a lot of the time, people do not dare to disagree with you. That can be a plus, but it can also be a minus. How many of Bowie's co-workers do you think have the guts to say anything against him? I think very few dare to say anything. They don't criticize him, which means all he hears is positive stuff. It's just the way it is. You should realize that it's the same thing everywhere.

In reply to:

I take offense that you believe that I am incapable of evaluating an argument on its own mertis, that my choices of arguments are driven solely by some construct that you've invented.


I don't think you're incapable of doing that, but I know how people work and behave. One of the most important things for us is to feel that we belong somewhere. People need to feel that they belong. So they make sure they belong. That's why we have gangs, Nazis, in-crowds, etc. Don't you have this need? If not, then good for you. Personally, I've never felt this need to belong. If it's the same for you, I think that's great. But I know that most people need to feel that they belong to this or that group. Are you one of those people who have this need? If you are, don't you think that, in order to stay in this particular group you've selected, you have to agree with the other members in this group? If you want to be a part of Teenage Wildlife, you can't tell the TW in-crowd to fuck off, can you? That's the problem with groups of all kinds, you can seldom follow your inner voice, you have to follow the law of the mob. There's no place for individuality. That's why I don't believe in groups or followings or organisations. Btw, there was once talk of a Teenage Wildlife Hall of Fame. If that had become a reality, I probably wouldn't be here today.

In reply to:

You seem to be suggesting that I am both an idiot and a "dead fish," whatever that means


No, no. Never said you're an idiot and never meant that. The "dead fish" refers to the quote above: "Only dead fish swim with the stream." Which means that the real individuals don't go with the flow. Only dead fish go with the flow. I was not talking about you, I was talking about everyone, myself included. It's not too late for anyone to choose to go his/her own way instead of going with the flow.

WildWind: [Two words: you're wrong]: I will assume from your lack of response that you've abandoned the idea of a twister/WildWind conspiracy. So the remaining two substantive issues I see in your disagreement with me are 1) The existence of "sacred cows"/a TW "in-crowd" and 2) Your perceptions of my responses in this thread as misdirected and inadequate. I will deal with these one at a time and attempt to be as simple as possible.

1) The existence of "sacred cows"/a TW "in-crowd

This is really quite simple. You say that you don't have sacred cows because in addition to your issues here with me and twister,

In reply to:

A long time ago, I had a real disagreement with Dara...Some months ago I had a disagreement with rubleem...Also, I remember that I had a heated discussion with Alice_Falls several months ago. Me and Kirk had a heated discussion about money and taxes last year...I think Marquis and I have very different views on drugs, so there's another disagreement.


Please consider the following examples that twister and I provided above:

In reply to:

[twister]WildWind recently accosting me for what I've had to say about 96dbfreak, the numerous clashes I've had with power2charm (I believe it's "feckless tit" he's been known to refer to me as), the rather heated WildWind VS. Einar Perfect Day debate (by the way, WW, Einar was right, they completely destroyed the song). I believe WildWind's first post on this thread was very much against power2charm and what he was saying...Kirk...denounced a thread of mine regarding girls losing their virginity with other girls as "a classic, shit twister thread"


In reply to:

[WildWind]I'll point you to this post, and this one, and another and one more, in which twister and I have disagreed with each other on issues of varying importance.


Additionally, Sysiyo, rubleem, and Koz had a heated debate about anti-semitism, and I told them that they were all wrong in ways. Dr. Evil and Sysiyo conflicted for quite some time. 96dbfreak has had heated arguments with Kirk, power2charm, and twister, and in the first case, SoulLoveChild quickly came to 96dbfreak's defense. twister and Tristan had it out for a while. I once had a nasty tiff with Monkeyboy. Anony-moosey once basically told Adam that he was full of shit. twister and I went through the ringer at the hands of many in the most recent THBDB debate. power2charm has had political conflict with Andyst and Dara. There was a recent disagreement between Ruskie, the ethereal dawn, and Silverstar. In fact, Ruskie takes the piss out of me all the time. Shall I go on?

Geez, with all the conflict around here, I'm wondering where is this "everyone" that always "jumps to the defense" of the "sacred cows." In fact, why don't you clarify who exactly this "in-crowd" is, so I can come up with some more specific examples.

Face it, eraserhead. Sacred cows don't exist. People agree or disagree with each other based on their own beliefs in the context of a particular discussion. People who are patting each other on the back one second might be at each other's throats the next, and it's because we all have our own thoughts and opinions and are capable of applying them in a specific context.

2) Your perceptions of my responses in this thread as misdirected and inadequate

You say

In reply to:

You had already posted to this thread, and I was dissapointed with your replies.


I've already replied

In reply to:

it's pretty arrogant of you to be the self-appointed judge of which disagreements are vehement enough.


I've also already explained twice why my response wasn't more vehement, and I'm not going to do so again. Frankly, I think it's quite presumptuous of you to criticise my response to an opinion that is a lot more relevant to me (being a minority in the US that frequently speaks a language other than English) than it is to you.

In reply to:

I think you WW could have praised Snowchild's intelligent post instead of finding something wrong with it.


Snowchild expressed anger at the fact that "no one has dared" to challenge power2charm's original post. What was wrong with me pointing out that I and several others already had?

Furthermore, you should know by now that I am not an "I agree" kind of poster. And the fact that I pointed out that I had already disagreed with power2charm should have been evidence enough that I agreed with SnowChild.

Finally, I do have to take issue with this:

In reply to:

"Only dead fish swim with the stream." Which means that the real individuals don't go with the flow. Only dead fish go with the flow.


That is, in a word, absurd. It's only real to be contrary? Ha! It's just as much herd-mentality to reject something solely because it's popular as it is to embrace it solely because it's popular. What's real is to form your own opinions and thoughts and stick with them (in the absence of compelling evidence or arguments that make you change your mind), whether they're popular or not. What's the point of swimming against the stream if your destination is in that direction?

That quotation does, however, reveal that you are more interested in being contrary than you are in considering logical, rational arguments on their own merits.

There are a lot of other nits I could pick in your post, but you're so wrong about the substantive issues that I really don't see the point

Ruskie: [Little invitro]:

In reply to:

I can't really criticize Evan for not jumping in here. Adam is the moderator, which means he has to bite his tongue sometimes, I guess.


I don't want to intrude on the conversation here, but this seemed a little out of place to me. Granted I haven't read everypost in this thread, I've seen nothing that would warent censorship or the locking of this thread. Of course discussing a topic such as racism will offend people, but I hardly think that means it shouldn't be allowed to take place. We should be glad we're part of a community were something such as racism can be discussed openly and maturely (by most anyhow).

EtherealFantasy: I have not read all the way through yet, but really in response to the thing about Chinese and their Chinatown's.. I , a very pale Norweigian-American girl drive two hours at least once a month to go shop and eat at the Chinatown here in Washington. When I am there shopping around, I see plenty of non asians doing exactly the same thing. Chinatown is not closed off to other races, actually if you really look into it, you will find that it is more an international district than a Chinese district. You will find Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese, Phillipino, and more. That is just naming the main races. However I do admit, I have driven through south Seattle once, that's the black Neighborhood, and everyone looked at me weird even in the car, then stopping for gas people had to come over to me, who was still in the vehicle and flip shit.. So there are some neighborhhood's around only open to one race. Anyway's my point., It's very common to go to a coffee shop and hear other languages when you live on the coastlines. That is where people immigrate to. If you want your Arian nation, go inland. There the only racial diversity you will find will be the segregation between Native American's and those Bastard white people that stole the land.- Try to remember, you are the descendant of an immigrant too, and your family never tried to learn the Native tongue.

SnowChild: [No Sacred Cows]:

In reply to:

I take offense to this, as I as well as Trash, FiGgU_, Tati_wl and EuropeanCanon all indicated that we disagreed with the expressed sentiment. Some were done with sarcasm, some were explicit.


Oh I see, taking disagreement means adding comments like "I think it's good that you admit that you have these thoughts and feelings" [Trash]; "It's silly" [FiGgU]; "I would really, really hate it if someone ... made some comment like 'God, I hate those loud Mexicans'" [Oh, I believe that is you] and my personal favourite: "Deportation and repatriation is the only answer." [EuropeanCanon]. Is this Oprah's bookclub is it? Instead of expressing passionate concern why don't we sit in a neat circle and express such feelings as "This post gives me the primary feeling of ... SADNESS. It stirs within me ... UNCERTAINTY. Ahhh, I believe I feel .... ANGER ....

Why do I get the feeling that all this 'disagreement' is merely disguised agreement when all is being offered are sympathetic analogies and charming advice? Why don't we go down to the nearest war crimes tribunal and hear some more stories of those on trial about now they expressed their 'disagreement'. I thought Power2Charm was being really disgusting and I told him. I believe in what I had to say. I said it. I upheld it. Since he was completely no-bars and saying what he felt, I believed I could be just as passionate. I didn't want to give a half-arse, watered down response. Why should I when Power2Charm can do it?

SnowChild: [Power2Harm]:

In reply to:

I do not mean 'Chinese' as the Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese, and even the Koreans and Phillipinos all look pretty spiffy yoked to a rickshaw, imho.


And I believe you'd look very spiffy too, yoked to a pony with a feather in your cap called macaroni.

In reply to:

If the rest of humanity were just like me there would be none of the social problems of today. Why? Because everybody would act identically, and all social discomfort would evaporate.


I believe you. And that world is called 'the space on the Teenage Wildlife Message Board' occupied by Power2Charm and his cliche, and obviously if not for the rest of us trying to express a contary opinion, you would all be very social comfortable right now sharing stories about how annoying people other than yourselves are.

In reply to:

Asians, on the other hand, haven't been persecuted to nearly the same degree (in the US, at least), and they haven't organized here to keep past persecutions an open wound. Therefore, it is easier to "share" about them.


I assume the 'about' is not accidently suppose to read 'with'. Oh go ahead then. Do share. You digust me, but an opinion is worth hearing. Let's talk about the Asians since none of them are here. Heavens, none of them, and other races, can be Bowie fans can they? Have you formulated a secret handshake yet?

In reply to:

I'm glad some people were disappointed, shocked, found them funny, agreed to similar feelings. The response should be varied.


And variety unfortunately, includes me.

WildWind: [Hmph. A SnowChild/eraserhead "alliance"]:
Oh this is just brill, SnowChild. So not only are you and eraserhead the self-appointed judges of what responses are vehement enough and the presumers of people's motives in responding or not responding, but you are now also telling me how to feel? Sorry, but no.

I am not going to explain again why I chose to post what I did. I am not going to repeat the scores of examples twister and I have posted of challenges to and among this supposed "in-crowd." And I am not going to re-list the perfectly valid reasons why someone might have chosen not to respond to power2charm.

You, SnowChild, are too presumptuous for words.

twister: [SnowChild wants a world where everyone is the same]:

In reply to:

[WildWind] In general, I would argue that coming to the defense of someone you like is friendship, not mob mentality. If someone calls my sister an abrasive weirdo, of course I am going to defend her. That is part of my role as someone close to her.


But even then you're still a million miles from eraserhead's "sacred cow" belief, in that if your sister were to be the one calling some other undeserving soul "an abrasive weirdo" I don't doubt you'd be just as likely to openly disagree with your sister. Of course, presumably one of the reasons you care about your sister is because she isn't the type to tell undeserving souls nasty things (presumably, of course). I'm sure I'm not saying anything you didn't already know, just building on your analogy.

In reply to:

[eraserhead] Just watch Ricki Lake and you get a pretty good picture of our situation on planet Earth today.


No, you don't. This is akin to saying "read America's most wanted criminals list, it proves everyone's a criminal".

In reply to:

[eraserhead] So there was one statement in her post you disagreed with, and, according to what you're saying now, the rest of the post was really good, in your opinion. Why didn't you say so then?


I don't think you're looking at this properly. Yes, WildWind criticised SnowChild's original post on one point - but the point that she was criticising was the statement that no-one had said anything anti-p2c. By criticising that statement she was asserting her anti-p2c post very clearly.

In reply to:

[eraserhead] But why does twister still agree with p2c, why does he neglect Snowchild's post? What do you think?


I think it's brave to stand up and say "I'm not perfect". Particularly knowing how people can react. Look at the grilling you gave Emil, and tell me it didn't take guts for him to admit his knee-jerk reactions. And I don't think power2charm said or did anything wrong. So he got pissed off with a couple of foreigners. If he had beat the shit out of them with a baseball bat, I wouldn't be defending him right now.

Another point, the last time power2charm created a thread, on the subject of Hugh Hefner, I disagreed with him.

Unless you actually have some basis to your arguments that most "in-crowders" are just going with the flow, accept how wrong you are.

In reply to:

[eraserhead] I think, a lot of the time, people do not dare to disagree with you.


Which is why WildWind has perhaps been labelled a "bitch" more than any other poster here?

In reply to:

[WildWind] Face it, eraserhead. Sacred cows don't exist. People agree or disagree with each other based on their own beliefs in the context of a particular discussion. People who are patting each other on the back one second might be at each other's throats the next, and it's because we all have our own thoughts and opinions and are capable of applying them in a specific context.

[...]

That is, in a word, absurd. It's only real to be contrary? Ha! It's just as much herd-mentality to reject something solely because it's popular as it is to embrace it solely because it's popular. What's real is to form your own opinions and thoughts and stick with them (in the absence of compelling evidence or arguments that make you change your mind), whether they're popular or not. What's the point of swimming against the stream if your destination is in that direction?

That quotation does, however, reveal that you are more interested in being contrary than you are in considering logical, rational arguments on their own merits.


Yeah. I second all that. Hopefully you won't assume I'm agreeing just because it's WildWind, seen as we've already provided examples of us disagreeing, and on this very thread we'd both posted pro- and anti- p2c posts respectively, before this "sacred cow" debate even began.

In reply to:

[SnowChild] Oh I see, taking disagreement means adding comments like "I think it's good that you admit that you have these thoughts and feelings" [Trash]; "It's silly" [FiGgU]; "I would really, really hate it if someone ... made some comment like 'God, I hate those loud Mexicans'" [Oh, I believe that is you] and my personal favourite: "Deportation and repatriation is the only answer." [EuropeanCanon].


Could this be the worst example of quoting people out of context I have ever seen? Trash's post did indeed say it was good to acknowledge these feelings - in the sense that it was the first step in educating one's self to be better. fiGgU_ described p2c's attitude as "silly", which I think is a perfectly fine criticism. If anything it belittles p2c far more than your fury. WildWind turned it around to show it to p2c from the POV of the people he was being annoyed by to show him his asshole nature, and I get the impression that you're simply too fucking stupid to understand what EuropeanCanon was saying. Read it again. Repeatedly. Word by word if necessary. You moron.

In reply to:

[SnowChild] Why do I get the feeling that all this 'disagreement' is merely disguised agreement when all is being offered are sympathetic analogies and charming advice?


Because you're a moron.

In reply to:

[SnowChild] And variety unfortunately, includes me.


Unfortunately? You're the one thinking everyone should be spewing venemous anti-p2c bile like yourself, the rest of us are happy for the variety that allows you to spew such bile while I merrily defend him and WildWind displays her own sadness and everyone does everything their own way.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows


 
Entire thread
Subject  Posted byPosted on
*I am a Racist (03/02)  Auntie Prism02/21/11 12:42 PM
..Re: I am a Racist (03/02)  Auntie Prism02/21/11 12:44 PM
.*Will I post another of this length? Probably not  Auntie Prism02/21/11 12:45 PM
Jump to

Teenage Wildlife Davie Bowie | Email Us! Forums powered by WWWThreads v5.1.5perl

Teenage Wildlife Home Page Bowie's music Info on Bowie Other Media Have your say! Search the Site Help me!


Toolbar (Interact)

Etete Systems