Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 20:50:41 GMT -5
If it were my wife, daughter, or mother, we would both likely have had a laugh about it because it wasn't about violence towards women, it was about beating an opponent (and the opponent DID trip, allowing the meme to even exist in the first place, of their own accord)... and none of them (wife, daughters, mother) are fact-and-reality-hating feminists. Also you didn't confirm or deny: Would you have called it "violence against men" if it had been a man that was the opponent that tripped and a meme was made showing getting knocked over by a gold ball? Be honest, we all know that your answer is "no". I absolutely would call it violence towards men if it were a man in HRC's place. And no, you only think my answer would be no. Ive never said anything about endorsing violence against anyone. As the POTUS, DT should be setting an example for men and women and not resorting to childish tweets and name calling. He is not a good example to anyone. If that's true (and I seriously doubt that it is), then you'd be wrong then too. I do agree with your perception of Trump though.
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 30,427
|
Post by andi9899 on Sept 25, 2017 8:12:03 GMT -5
I absolutely would call it violence towards men if it were a man in HRC's place. And no, you only think my answer would be no. Ive never said anything about endorsing violence against anyone. As the POTUS, DT should be setting an example for men and women and not resorting to childish tweets and name calling. He is not a good example to anyone. If that's true (and I seriously doubt that it is), then you'd be wrong then too. I do agree with your perception of Trump though. Who says I'm wrong? You? Forgive me if I don't really care. I disagree with just about everything you've said in this thread so far.
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Sept 25, 2017 8:15:45 GMT -5
I love the new double standard. Since the left chooses to ignore it's own criminal behavior and thugs smashing and vandalizing then I am gonna ignore it too.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,514
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 25, 2017 8:18:22 GMT -5
I love the new double standard. Since the left chooses to ignore it's own criminal behavior and thugs smashing and vandalizing then I am gonna ignore it too. Great. You won't be posting about it anymore because your going to ignore it. Win-win for all.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 25, 2017 8:40:07 GMT -5
Somehow, I don't think we are going to come to a consensus on this issue.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 25, 2017 14:02:18 GMT -5
"The Left" is a mighty broad brush. I'm quite sure there was an antifa thread where the majority of the 'left' was opposed to violent thuggery.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 20:44:34 GMT -5
If that's true (and I seriously doubt that it is), then you'd be wrong then too. I do agree with your perception of Trump though. Who says I'm wrong? You? Forgive me if I don't really care. I disagree with just about everything you've said in this thread so far. No. Not me. I don't say, just out of the blue, because I think a certain way, that you would be wrong. Facts say you would be wrong. It's not "violence against" anyone. It's one politician winning against another so much so that they knock them over. Context matters.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 20:48:20 GMT -5
"The Left" is a mighty broad brush. I'm quite sure there was an antifa thread where the majority of the 'left' was opposed to violent thuggery. No more broad of a brush than "The Right"... or "Trump Supporters"... or "Supporters of Confederate Monuments and Icons".
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 25, 2017 23:58:49 GMT -5
Quite sure the shooby post I was responding to didn't mention "The Right", "Trump Supporters", or "Supporters of Confederate Monuments and Icons". However, I am not asserting that you personally feel those were contained therein.
And why anyone would want to be a supporter of Confederate monuments and icons, somehow relishing in that failure of treasonous, secessionist slavers, is beyond me. Why folks even fly that flag and succumb to revision that it is not a racist symbol when, in fact, that's exactly what it has been turned into.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 0:58:48 GMT -5
Quite sure the shooby post I was responding to didn't mention "The Right", "Trump Supporters", or "Supporters of Confederate Monuments and Icons". However, I am not asserting that you personally feel those were contained therein.
And why anyone would want to be a supporter of Confederate monuments and icons, somehow relishing in that failure of treasonous, secessionist slavers, is beyond me. Why folks even fly that flag and succumb to revision that it is not a racist symbol when, in fact, that's exactly what it has been turned into. regarding the first paragraph: I was just pointing out that it's not only accusations of "the left..." that are broad brush strokes... nothing more, nothing less. regarding the second paragraph: People that know the true history of the Confederacy support them because they were for a resumption of the original intent of our Founding Fathers, after the Federal government (led by the officials elected by the northern states) lost their way. There was nothing "treasonous" about the Confederacy, because it wasn't until AFTER the war, the right to leave the Union was removed from the Constitution. And (this may shock the hell out of you) MOST of the people that fought for the Confederacy didn't own any slaves... to suggest that they were "secessionist slavers" is... (ummm... what's that term... oh, yeah... revisionist... that's the word)... suggesting that is revisionist. Not to mention, you do know that the last slave freed in the US was a slave in a NORTHERN state... right? The idea that the flag is racist is the revisionist history. I would suggest you do a little research on the subject, but I know that you don't like your flawed preconceptions challenged by reality, so what would be the point of making that suggestion?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 26, 2017 2:31:07 GMT -5
Quite sure the shooby post I was responding to didn't mention "The Right", "Trump Supporters", or "Supporters of Confederate Monuments and Icons". However, I am not asserting that you personally feel those were contained therein.
And why anyone would want to be a supporter of Confederate monuments and icons, somehow relishing in that failure of treasonous, secessionist slavers, is beyond me. Why folks even fly that flag and succumb to revision that it is not a racist symbol when, in fact, that's exactly what it has been turned into. regarding the first paragraph: I was just pointing out that it's not only accusations of "the left..." that are broad brush strokes... nothing more, nothing less. regarding the second paragraph: People that know the true history of the Confederacy support them because they were for a resumption of the original intent of our Founding Fathers, after the Federal government (led by the officials elected by the northern states) lost their way. There was nothing "treasonous" about the Confederacy, because it wasn't until AFTER the war, the right to leave the Union was removed from the Constitution. And (this may shock the hell out of you) MOST of the people that fought for the Confederacy didn't own any slaves... to suggest that they were "secessionist slavers" is... (ummm... what's that term... oh, yeah... revisionist... that's the word)... suggesting that is revisionist. Not to mention, you do know that the last slave freed in the US was a slave in a NORTHERN state... right? The idea that the flag is racist is the revisionist history. I would suggest you do a little research on the subject, but I know that you don't like your flawed preconceptions challenged by reality, so what would be the point of making that suggestion? Gosh, I can't imagine why anyone would think it's racist....
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 3:20:09 GMT -5
regarding the first paragraph: I was just pointing out that it's not only accusations of "the left..." that are broad brush strokes... nothing more, nothing less. regarding the second paragraph: People that know the true history of the Confederacy support them because they were for a resumption of the original intent of our Founding Fathers, after the Federal government (led by the officials elected by the northern states) lost their way. There was nothing "treasonous" about the Confederacy, because it wasn't until AFTER the war, the right to leave the Union was removed from the Constitution. And (this may shock the hell out of you) MOST of the people that fought for the Confederacy didn't own any slaves... to suggest that they were "secessionist slavers" is... (ummm... what's that term... oh, yeah... revisionist... that's the word)... suggesting that is revisionist. Not to mention, you do know that the last slave freed in the US was a slave in a NORTHERN state... right? The idea that the flag is racist is the revisionist history. I would suggest you do a little research on the subject, but I know that you don't like your flawed preconceptions challenged by reality, so what would be the point of making that suggestion? Gosh, I can't imagine why anyone would think it's racist.... Bet you didn't notice the Cross in the hand of the one wearing sunglasses without a hood. Is the Cross racist because they usurped it? If it's not then the flag is not. Do you notice the only flags in this picture? If their improper usage of them doesn't make them racist, then it doesn't make their improper usage of the Confederate flag cause it to be racist. I wonder where they are holding this meeting... Looks like a church. Yes, by Golly is IS a church (and one with an American flag in it for good measure!) Does that make all churches racist? It's a pretty simple concept to grasp: their improper usage of a thing doesn't tarnish that thing... unless people let it. I won't let it. Others could choose to not let it as well and then maybe it wouldn't hold the power over them that it does.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 26, 2017 14:05:34 GMT -5
Looks like quite a few Christian Americans are also racist.
And (this may shock the hell out of you) MOST of the people that fought for the Confederacy didn't own any slaves... to suggest that they were "secessionist slavers" is... (ummm... what's that term... oh, yeah... revisionist... that's the word)... suggesting that is revisionist. Not to mention, you do know that the last slave freed in the US was a slave in a NORTHERN state... right?
Doesn't shock anything out of me as I never said MOST of the people were slavers. But they all lived in a slave culture and benefitted from that. There was no revision.
The idea that the flag is racist is the revisionist history.
It is your opinion, which you probably think is fact, that the Confederate flag is not racist. Unfortunately for you this puts you into the revisionist mode as racists have turned that flag into a racist symbol. To think otherwise is to revise what has happened to it. We all know you don't want to admit that, but in this case your flawed opinion is challenged by reality.
I would suggest you do a little research on the subject, but I know that you don't like your flawed preconceptions challenged by reality, so what would be the point of making that suggestion?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 21:51:29 GMT -5
...It is your opinion, which you probably think is fact, that the Confederate flag is not racist. ...
It actually is fact. Do some research before you post incorrect drivel.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 27, 2017 16:02:13 GMT -5
I just knew you would turn your opinion into fact and throw an ad hominem bomb to make it seem authentic.
So I did some research...it's in your post #101.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2017 20:56:17 GMT -5
I just knew you would turn your opinion into fact and throw an ad hominem bomb to make it seem authentic.
So I did some research...it's in your post #101. Then you "knew" incorrectly. Nothing I've ever stated to be fact has been anything other than fact... including in this thread. Libel is illegal and is also against ToS.
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 30,427
|
Post by andi9899 on Sept 28, 2017 6:23:58 GMT -5
Gosh, I can't imagine why anyone would think it's racist.... Bet you didn't notice the Cross in the hand of the one wearing sunglasses without a hood. Is the Cross racist because they usurped it? If it's not then the flag is not. Do you notice the only flags in this picture? If their improper usage of them doesn't make them racist, then it doesn't make their improper usage of the Confederate flag cause it to be racist. I wonder where they are holding this meeting... Looks like a church. Yes, by Golly is IS a church (and one with an American flag in it for good measure!) Does that make all churches racist? It's a pretty simple concept to grasp: their improper usage of a thing doesn't tarnish that thing... unless people let it. I won't let it. Others could choose to not let it as well and then maybe it wouldn't hold the power over them that it does. Racist people can believe in God. Not sure why the fact that they do makes you think they are any less racist. There are some horrible people out there that are varying degrees of religious.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 28, 2017 11:18:21 GMT -5
Then you "knew" incorrectly. Nothing I've ever stated to be fact has been anything other than fact... including in this thread.
Libel is illegal and is also against ToS.
The fact that my opinion that the Confederate flag has been turned into a racist symbol indicates that your opinion that it isn't is not a fact. Therefore, you are failing, and, subsequently, your opinion is not fact.
If you want to believe my truths about that are libelous, instead of whining about it call your lawyer and sue me. Or beg management to find some reason to censure me.
All anyone needs to do to see that the flag has been compromised is to view the KKKluxers in your post #101. Perhaps your efforts at convincing the world should start with those that have convinced the world.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 28, 2017 15:47:29 GMT -5
@richardintn and dondub, this line of discussion will stop here. Get back on topic and stay off one another. mmhmm, Politics Moderator
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 19:46:17 GMT -5
Bet you didn't notice the Cross in the hand of the one wearing sunglasses without a hood. Is the Cross racist because they usurped it? If it's not then the flag is not. Do you notice the only flags in this picture? If their improper usage of them doesn't make them racist, then it doesn't make their improper usage of the Confederate flag cause it to be racist. I wonder where they are holding this meeting... Looks like a church. Yes, by Golly is IS a church (and one with an American flag in it for good measure!) Does that make all churches racist? It's a pretty simple concept to grasp: their improper usage of a thing doesn't tarnish that thing... unless people let it. I won't let it. Others could choose to not let it as well and then maybe it wouldn't hold the power over them that it does. Racist people can believe in God. Not sure why the fact that they do makes you think they are any less racist. There are some horrible people out there that are varying degrees of religious. You missed the point. I didn't say racists couldn't believe in God. I said they use the symbols of God and people don't thnk that those things' reputations are tarnished. If it doesn't tarnish the symbols of God to be abused by them, then it doesn't tarnish other symbols when they abuse them either. It's an "either / or" situation. Either misuse by a group tarnishes the reputation of all things it misuses... or it doesn't tarnish any of them. Can't have it where it does for some and not others.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 19:51:43 GMT -5
Did I already give my gay snowman speech?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 28, 2017 20:29:01 GMT -5
Two posts have been removed. @richardintn and dondub, I told you both the line of discussion involving the two of you was to stop. I wasn't indulging in fingertip exercises. Both of you stay on topic. Posts that continue the nonsense will be removed. mmhmm, Politics Modertor
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 30,427
|
Post by andi9899 on Sept 28, 2017 21:13:42 GMT -5
Did I already give my gay snowman speech? No. Let's hear it!
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 30,427
|
Post by andi9899 on Sept 28, 2017 21:22:49 GMT -5
Racist people can believe in God. Not sure why the fact that they do makes you think they are any less racist. There are some horrible people out there that are varying degrees of religious. You missed the point. I didn't say racists couldn't believe in God. I said they use the symbols of God and people don't thnk that those things' reputations are tarnished. If it doesn't tarnish the symbols of God to be abused by them, then it doesn't tarnish other symbols when they abuse them either. It's an "either / or" situation. Either misuse by a group tarnishes the reputation of all things it misuses... or it doesn't tarnish any of them. Can't have it where it does for some and not others. No. Welts pointed out clear racism and you said "But the cross! But the flag! Just because racists have flags and crosses, I refuse to believe that racism is bad." You're wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 21:29:11 GMT -5
You missed the point. I didn't say racists couldn't believe in God. I said they use the symbols of God and people don't thnk that those things' reputations are tarnished. If it doesn't tarnish the symbols of God to be abused by them, then it doesn't tarnish other symbols when they abuse them either. It's an "either / or" situation. Either misuse by a group tarnishes the reputation of all things it misuses... or it doesn't tarnish any of them. Can't have it where it does for some and not others. No. Welts pointed out clear racism and you said "But the cross! But the flag! Just because racists have flags and crosses, I refuse to believe that racism is bad." You're wrong. Not even close to what I actually said. I fully, 100%, believe that racism is bad and wrong. No matter who is being racist to whom. What I said was (paraphrased): "But the cross! But the flag! If racists have those flags and crosses, and they are not considered racist, then them having the Confederate flag doesn't make the Confederate flag racist either."
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,726
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on Sept 29, 2017 7:43:43 GMT -5
No. Welts pointed out clear racism and you said "But the cross! But the flag! Just because racists have flags and crosses, I refuse to believe that racism is bad." You're wrong. Not even close to what I actually said. I fully, 100%, believe that racism is bad and wrong. No matter who is being racist to whom. What I said was (paraphrased): "But the cross! But the flag! If racists have those flags and crosses, and they are not considered racist, then them having the Confederate flag doesn't make the Confederate flag racist either." You might want to reflect on how the swastika is viewed here, in Germany, and in other places. It was a sacred symbol, and still is in parts of the world. However, it is also the most well known symbol of Nazi Germany and therefore seen as a symbol of hate by many. www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007453
In your part of the country, the south, some see the confederate flag as you do. However, most people in the North and parts of the South see it as a symbol of White supremacy, which it also is. The cross is used around the globe by different people of multiple colors and races. The American flag is used by more folks who aren't supremacists so it hasn't suffered symbol association the way the Confederate flag has. Only klansman in their white robes evoke white supremacy more to most people. MO.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 10:59:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 8:08:25 GMT -5
When I started teaching, my second year, an older teacher was retiring. She gave me all her old books, including a bulletin board idea book from, I don't know, the Middle Ages ... it had a lovely display for winter that it suggested be titled How to Build A Gay Snowman. Now, of course this book was from the pre, gay=homosexual days and the bulletin board was referring to the idea of a happy, carefree snowman... which was its traditional meaning. Had I decided to just go with it, I would have absolutely expected that I would have been getting calls. And not about happy snowmen. Sometimes, the meaning of something changes because of how society changes. So, go ahead and build a gay snowman if you want, but be prepared for people to interpret your actions on their understanding of commonly accepted meaning, and not your own.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 29, 2017 8:17:51 GMT -5
I see Ms. Griffin felt she was fading from the spotlight so it trying to be relevant again - throwing a fit about ageism and sexism - like she had nothing to do with what happened to her. "Let's pretend the country was upset about my photograph because I'm a middle aged female and not because of the content." Dear Heavens, I hope most people aren't that stupid.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,726
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on Sept 29, 2017 8:33:58 GMT -5
I see Ms. Griffin felt she was fading from the spotlight so it trying to be relevant again - throwing a fit about ageism and sexism - like she had nothing to do with what happened to her. "Let's pretend the country was upset about my photograph because I'm a middle aged female and not because of the content." Dear Heavens, I hope most people aren't that stupid. She does have a point. Notice how no one is talking about Taylor Shields the guy who made the photo and owns the rights to it. He's the one who titled it 'Gore' instead of what she wanted which was the blood out of his whatever. Their intentions were not the same. He refused to explain himself and the media and us on the board let that go. He's the guy who will make 6 figures off of selling the photo, not Kathy.
Why is the male photog unimportant in all this? ew.com/news/2017/05/30/kathy-griffin-trump-head-photo-tyler-shields/
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 29, 2017 9:01:03 GMT -5
I see Ms. Griffin felt she was fading from the spotlight so it trying to be relevant again - throwing a fit about ageism and sexism - like she had nothing to do with what happened to her. "Let's pretend the country was upset about my photograph because I'm a middle aged female and not because of the content." Dear Heavens, I hope most people aren't that stupid. She does have a point. Notice how no one is talking about Taylor Shields the guy who made the photo and owns the rights to it. He's the one who titled it 'Gore' instead of what she wanted which was the blood out of his whatever. Their intentions were not the same. He refused to explain himself and the media and us on the board let that go. He's the guy who will make 6 figures off of selling the photo, not Kathy.
Why is the male photog unimportant in all this? ew.com/news/2017/05/30/kathy-griffin-Trump-head-photo-tyler-shields/
He wasn't the one in the picture and almost nobody gives at crap about the intentions or different titles or any of that other stuff. I suppose that's why. So no. She doesn't have a point. If he had been in the picture also and nobody said anything about him, she might have a point. As it stands, she's just trying for her 15 minutes....again. It's not new that people see a picture and don't care about who took it. Most don't even know who took it and they don't care. Unless she was forced to pose in front of this guy, it doesn't matter to most people. I'm not saying that isn't a lack of looking at the whole issue - just that it doesn't matter to most people.
I happen to agree with you that he is as much as fault when it comes to handing out "dumbass" points, but it isn't because she's female and he's male and age and all that other stuff that people don't care. It's because she was the dumbass in the picture.
|
|