Originally posted by Surtur
Ha no:
He said it. He tried to back track, but he sure as shit said it. I wasn't the only one who saw it. Multiple people did. He back tracked to say "oh I meant it was a good indicator!" and "you aren't a misogynist because you do this, you do this because you are a misogynist." Which again, as you can see, wasn't actually what was said.
You're just proving my point. He never said that referring to a woman as ''a female'' is in itself misogynist. He said that misogynists generally refer to women as ''females''.
Nor is it the only strange thing he has said, just the most recent. So again: a bastion of rational thought this person is not. Thus, this person lacking "patience" to deal with people is totally irrelevant to the quality of the GDF.
It's quite strange for you to speak of others misunderstanding things. I said it would be stupid to compare the Christians to the Nazi's. I said anyone who does is asinine. I then was the one to point out the guy didn't actually say it in his blog. You see I didn't post the article. All the thread shows is the media shouldn't be trusted, you have the washington post or the washington times saying he compared them to a nazi, but he never truly did.
''So he compares conservatives and Christians' "loss" to Nazis failure in WWII and wants them to be treated the same way the National Socialists (Nazis) were treated after the war. LOL''
Which is both outright incorrect and extremely disingenuous. Yet none of you challenge him on this and instead go on some tangent about the liberal infested Harvard. I.e. a circle-jerk.
You can certainly sit there and talk about the forum being a circle jerk which is fine, but if it is then to me, the only change I've seen then? Is what the circle jerk focuses on. People have been circle jerking each other on one thing or another for a long time. It's always been there. You can see it done over Superman in the comic versus parts, and there's always been something to circle jerk over in GDF. The players change, the circle jerking doesn't.
This is somewhat irrelevant to my post. From my experience, when I first started posting here over a decade ago, the GDF had way more people of different opinions and beliefs and there was a lot more nuance in the discussion there. Now it's almost impossible to have a normal discussion in there without Stigma or Raisen bringing up some weird theory on the ''regressive left'' etc., without it even having to do anything with the topic at hand.
Originally posted by Surtur
True, but then people shouldn't pop over here to talk shit.
Yeah, because that doesn't happen in any of the other sub-forums. I'm free to use this thread to give my opinion about the state of the GDF. Just like some of you people take your shit from the Comics VS. forum with you to the GDF. Also, aren't some of you talking shit about Lestov right now while he's not even there? Talk about a circle-jerk.
Originally posted by Scribble
"POC" is basically just the term "coloured person" dressed up in (barely) different words. Why is anyone proud of using this term?Not sure if anyone's noticed, but white people aren't actually white for the most part. We are all people of colour. Get some better ****ing terms already.
I think it has partly to do with person-first language. To many the other way around is defining the personhood through one aspect. Of course many other people have different opinions about it (you can look at the criticism part of the article for some).
Though generally the worst case scenario when using person-first language is that someone thinks you are an awkward or annoying person, with the other way you might hurt someone deeply, that's why I try to avoid it.
The history of racism and racist language in the US (with "colored bathrooms", etc.) is of course also part of why it is rejected by most.
Originally posted by Ax3l
I mean no matter what I think we can all agree that the smashing pumpkins have always been better than radiohead
Originally posted by Bardock42
Man, Eurovision sure is garbage
Originally posted by Bardock42I often use first-person language, particularly for people with specific disabilities or conditions, it's more the use of the word "colour" that I have issue with
I think it has partly to do with person-first language. To many the other way around is defining the personhood through one aspect. Of course many other people have different opinions about it (you can look at the criticism part of the article for some).Though generally the worst case scenario when using person-first language is that someone thinks you are an awkward or annoying person, with the other way you might hurt someone deeply, that's why I try to avoid it.
The history of racism and racist language in the US (with "colored bathrooms", etc.) is of course also part of why it is rejected by most.