Opinions on the expression of chauvinism, racism, homophobia, etc.

[Argos]

Originally Posted by nath

The first time I read your posts Argos, you were insulting the all the mods for a reason where you weren't involved at all....
I see you haven't changed as you still contest about the honesty, the fair judgment of the mods about a thread you haven't read....

Zorro 's complex ?

You didn't understand me at that time and you don't understand me now. I never insulted anyone in this forum. I expressed my opinion as I do now, to distinguish between a controverse discussion and a personal attack (and voting the most annoying member is an insult!). The result was foreseeable, my post was a warning what could be.

The Lux-thread is about the lacking romance between male and female and some disgusting feelings many women have during intercourse with men, as far as I understand and a good base for an interesting discussion, despite the wicked arguments of her, I even doubt that those are her own, because I heard most of them before.

What I stated as a member, was, that I don't want that any thread that might get unpleasant, should be closed before even a hint of personal attacks. If we only discuss things, where we all agree, it would be rather boring. So, please. don't interprete bad intentions into posts of others who do nothing more than you do, express their own opinions.

[Lux]

Seems that some people have lost the sense of humour completely. What's wrong with questioning our thoughts and ideas whether it be about religion or sexuality or whatever else?

agreed.

So someone used the wrong word. As you already stated a couple of sentances before that one, people have trouble with language and grammar, maybe they got the wrong definition. You keep bringing up the fact though, "How was my thread feministic?", "Do you even know what feministic means?" (or something along those lines).

the wrong word? people rained criticism based solely on this word. if they did not know what it means, why use it?

If it's free and open for all, then you shouldn't be surprised that others find it wrong to post such threads. Also, since you have your right here - others have their right to close any thread for whatever reasons.

i am not surprised. find it wrong? are you serious? it is not wrong. if others find it wrong, SO BE IT. but i do not find it surprising. never did, still do not. wait...are you saying the mods can close a thread based on "whatever reasons"? is that right..

I know the definition of "feminist", don't worry for my poor culture...
I know too the state of mind that some hard ultra-feminists could have and the hate they could have to wards men..
Don't tell me it doesn't exist.

i do not worry about your culture. just because SOME feminist hate men, does not make the definition of feminism to be "hatred of men." just because they COULD does not mean that is the definition. of course it exists. and just because someone hates men, does not make him or her feminist.




i do not know what this argument is over. someone tell me what it is over. i also have no idea what the mods discuss but when they say different things on the forum, i got confused as to why it was closed. frankly, it does not matter anyway, but initially the reasons were blurry.
and, one other thing. i posted it because...

[nath]

Originally Posted by Argos

You didn't understand me at that time and you don't understand me now. I never insulted anyone in this forum.

You DID. In big (red?) cap letters. You have erased this part after.
I don't think I'm the only one to have dreamed that on this forum.
I'm sure you could have expressed the same idea without wishing the worse things to them...

Originally Posted by Argos

(and voting the most annoying member is an insult!).

Remember what you've written about the mods...
They had just accepted the choices of the other members....
So, in a such case, to be fair you had to insult all the members who had voted in this category and more specifically the member who was at the origin of this idea.
None of the mods was at the origin of this idea.

Originally Posted by Argos

The Lux-thread is about the lacking romance between male and female and some disgusting feelings many women have during intercourse with men, as far as I understand and a good base for an interesting discussion, despite the wicked arguments of her, I even doubt that those are her own, because I heard most of them before.

I still don't understand how you can have a such interpretation as you haven't read it...

I don't think that normal women who chose to make love freely with a man could have those so......*no words found for that sorry *.....thoughts...or they are really neurotic if they continue to have any sexual relations with men after a such....adventure....except may be if they are zoophile...or masochist.

Lux, when you will be clear and able to stop to play just with the words, may be we could speak in a normal way.

[QueenBee]

it is not wrong. if others find it wrong, SO BE IT.

What? A person can't just post *anything* (I mean things like gross images, images with sexual acts, racism, whatever - and no I am not comparing these things to your thread but just using them as an example) and then just say "You don't like it? So be it."

wait...are you saying the mods can close a thread based on "whatever reasons"? is that right..

Yes because there are plenty right reasons to why a mod can close or delete a thread. For example images with nudity are accepted, but not with sexual acts so a mod could delete such a thread if it was based on posting pornography.

just because SOME feminist hate men, does not make the definition of feminism to be "hatred of men."

Just because some men are smelly doesn't mean they all are.

[Argos]

Offtop:

You DID. In big (red?) cap letters. You have erased this part after.
I don't think I'm the only one to have dreamed that on this forum.
I'm sure you could have expressed the same idea without wishing the worse things to them...

What I wrote was a christmas joke which we in Austria are used to say when people are quarrelling during the holidays. I heard this from an Irishman some time ago, too, so I thought this is an international saying. I never changed anything with my post, other people did.

Remember what you've written about the mods...
They had just accepted the choices of the other members....None of the mods was at the origin of this idea.

Wrong interpretation again! I wanted the mods to be nominated, so that they can see if it is fun to be one of those 'unwanted' people. It is the right of members to make suggestions and to vote, but mods have the right too, trying to persuade members not to make such a vote. Look at what happened with Lorna! This was not necessary and not unevitable.

I still don't understand how you can have a such interpretation as you haven't read it...

Simply because there is an ongoing discussion about this topic in my neighbourhood with similar arguments. But Lux' version is very pointed and exaggerated, but it's meant as satire. Therefore I was interested in hearing some arguments from the world outside.

[freddie]

Goodness. Don't you guys think this has dragged on for long enough? I mean seriously... You're making Lux's thread of questionable intelectual value an example of free speach? Come on. Free speach deserves better advocates than that. This is simply a case of free speach versus good taste. And yes... on this forum like on any other forum mods and admins are the ones who're the final judge on what's against good taste. Lux's thread was one of those examples in our opionion. It has nothing to do with people getting offended over it because it's hardly believable men would really get offended over such shit. It's about establishing some standards of what's considered normal and acceptable. And excuse me, but I don't see anything - anything at all - satirical in that thread. I said if Lux DID mean it in a satirical way it'd be a very kaufman-esque performance. Yet she unfortunately mistook that for my recognition of her satiric intention. But you know... all I wanted to say is that she is no Andy Kaufman.

[PowerPuff Grrl]

Originally Posted by freddie

And yes... on this forum like on any other forum mods and admins are the ones who're the final judge on what's against good taste. Lux's thread was one of those examples in our opionion. It has nothing to do with people getting offended over it because it's hardly believable men would really get offended over such shit. It's about establishing some standards of what's considered normal and acceptable.

Seriously?!
Because you guys were a lot better off closing the thread on the basis of it being offensive material (not in any way related to feminism!). There is a distinct line as to what is offensive and what is not; it's easier for people to adhere to that. By saying it was stupid is too subjective, the line gets blurred. What is stupid to one person isn't to another. A thread's lifespan is then determined moreso on the taste of at least one moderator. Far too many discrepancies can be made.

[haku]

Not a reply to anyone, just information:

If someone had created a thread titled 'White people are better' and went on saying stuff like 'Black people suck, they are stupid, they smell bad, they have pubic hair on their heads, and they look like apes' and other sophisticated arguments, that thread would have been closed and shortly deleted.
Same thing for a thread about how straight people are superior and gay people are abnormal sick deviants.
Same thing for a thread about how men are better and women are just inferior beings whose sole purpose is to serve men, make children and clean the house.
This is where the line is drawn.

[Lux]

i was saying women are better at sex. because i like them, sexually. i did NOT say they are superior beings. what ARE YOU talking about?



can't you people see that my thread was anything but serious? there was absolutely no point in it. people here are really bored.

[PowerPuff Grrl]

Originally Posted by haku

This is where the line is drawn.

But can the same thing be said for religion; The Torah/Koran/Hindu Vedas/Noble Eightfold Path/Book of Scientology is bullshit... (one of of these things is not like the other! )
Granted most of us don't gives two shit if such threads do pop out, but if we did regard religion as much as sexuality, does that line still apply?

[QueenBee]

Granted most of us don't gives two shit if such threads do pop out, but if we did regard religion as much as sexuality, does that line still apply?

I think if someone should have said "Christians suck and their bodies are disgusting, everyone knows this" then yes, but that's just my opinion.

Offtop:
PowerPuff Grrl, Omg, for some reason I thought you were ypsidan and I've been thinking so while looking at your other posts as well (in different threads), weeeird

[haku]

Religion is regarded as politics, religious organizations and political parties offer in their respective realms (which are sometimes one and the same) competing ideologies that often contradicts each other (collectivism vs capitalism, reincarnation vs eternal life). Religious and political ideologies can therefore be discussed, analysed, criticized, caricatured, etc.

[PowerPuff Grrl]

Groups can only identify with things that make them different from everybody else. Men -> Penises (or Penii?), gays -> gender of who they love, Blacks -> skin colour/facial features, Christians -> faith.

To insult somebody based on the difference of their identity is hateful.

Offtop:
QueenBee Weird indeed. But it's all good!

ETA:
Haku, point taken. However there is a difference between critisizing the practice of a faith, its interpretation and manipulations and whatnot, and just simply insulting the faith as a whole.

[freddie]

Originally Posted by PowerPuff Grrl

ETA:
Haku, point taken. However there is a difference between critisizing the practice of a faith, its interpretation and manipulations and whatnot, and just simply insulting the faith as a whole.

The text was about citicizing the practice and interpretation of faith, wasn't it? No one came out and said christians suck and presented it as a fact.

[Argos]

Originally Posted by freddie

The text was about citicizing the practice and interpretation of faith, wasn't it? No one came out and said christians suck and presented it as a fact.

It's more about the practice of sects and, sometimes, the church, not so much the faith and the bible. I don't see many parallels between the bible and Rachel's 'visitor-story', but she declared the bible as nonsense (intentionally overinterpreting her statement).

You see, it all makes no sense No reason to trust the bible

I wouldn't see it as an insult, but I am not affected by this.

Nevertheless it's necessary to question, what we do and what we believe, else we would be too prone to manipulation. In this sense there is no question for me about banning such topics from the forum.

[freddie]

Originally Posted by Argos

It's more about the practice of sects and, sometimes, the church, not so much the faith and the bible. I don't see many parallels between the bible and Rachel's 'visitor-story', but she declared the bible as nonsense (intentionally overinterpreting her statement).

She could have said koran or the old testament for all I care. It all comes down to the same thing. Questioning the bible and seeing it through the eyes of a clever satire. A satire which has so much more merit than men semen being gross just because that's someone's subjective opinion. But you know... take it as you will.

Originally Posted by Argos

Nevertheless it's necessary to question, what we do and what we believe, else we would be too prone to manipulation. In this sense there is no question for me about banning such topics from the forum.

I'm not sure if I understand correctly.. you want discussions like this (religious satire) banned from the forum? That's... not gonna happen. It's a free forum where every noteworthy (notice the noteworthy) discussion will be held into place.

[Argos]

Originally Posted by freddie

I'm not sure if I understand correctly.. you want discussions like this (religious satire) banned from the forum? That's... not gonna happen.

Completely misunderstood! On the contrary, this is exactly what I want, discussing such topics, to prove your own opinions and beliefs! I should have expressed myself more carefully!

[freddie]

Offtop:
Oh okay, then. So your problem is... closing of Lux's thread? Or what?

[Argos]

Offtop:

Originally Posted by freddie

Offtop:
Oh okay, then. So your problem is... closing of Lux's thread? Or what?

Not so much the closing itself, more the timing and the arguments for closing (ultrafem.-manhating-stupid-redundant). But I learnt that some people found it really disgusting, and I fully respect this. So, never mind!

[nath]

Offtop:
Have you read it now Argos? No provocation here, just to know....