Luckily we have a degree of free speech in this country
Sadly we have too many people who shouldn't be trusted with the privelidge.
Chat Forum
[closed]
The irony of the woofterball world cup...
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Sadly we have too many people who shouldn't be trusted with the privileged.
To be honest I think that is the saddest thing you can say, anyone has the right to say what they like.
'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,' was his attitude now.
S. G. Tallentyre, referring to Voltaire. Often attributed to Voltaire.Posted 1 year ago # -
OK, fine woofter is 'offensive'. But given that your first input on this thread was to use an exceedingly insulting and derogatory term to address me, your opinion is null and void
so by the same "logic" as you started a thread with an offensive term your opinion is null and void.toys I agree if the OP was making a political statement but I am not going to die for his right to be offensive to gay people you can if you want. You dont have the right to be offensive
Can I come round your house and call your partner/loved ones names and then expect you to leap to my defence and witter on about my free speech as I call them names
I am not doing the no one has the right to be not offended debate again.Posted 1 year ago # -
so by the same "logic" as you started a thread with an offensive term your opinion is null and void.Why comment to start with then? It's mainly because of your comments that it's already over 100 posts...
I am not doing the no one has the right to be not offended debate again.
Mainly, because you'll loose, again...
Posted 1 year ago # -
toys I agree if the OP was making a political statement but I am not going to die for his right to be offensive to gay people you can if you want. You dont have the right to be offensive
Can I come round your house and call your partner/loved ones names and then expect you to leap to my defence and witter on about my free speech as I call them names
I am not doing the no one has the right to be not offended debate again.Yes this is a logical fallacy known as the "Slippery Slope Argument". Zokes is not in your house is he? He is in public, and he isn't naming names either. If you came round my house and insulted my wife I'd give you a wallop. Rights or not.
In reality its a pretty weak insult anyway. Lets face it given the way footballers dive and make a scene they seem to bring derision upon themselves, Zokes unfortunate use of language might be ill considered but if woofter by association with "gay" means wet/soft/pansy then it's pretty spot on for footballers, just not so spot on for homosexuals. I'm no expert on the social distribution of pansyness but I know lots of straight people and lots of gay people, some of them are soft some are not, but there isn't a correlation between softness and sexual preference, so it's more inaccurate than offensive.
You dont have the right to be offensive
This is just pure misspeak. You have the right to say what you want, unfortunately offence might be a by product. So by inference you do have the right to be offensive. anyway offence isn't actually something you can do, its something taken by the recipient. It is the recipients choice to be offended.
Posted 1 year ago # -
And when somebody feels the need to be offended on STW, they most certainly will be - galloping along in a little bubble of righteousness on their ridiculous high horse...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ouch!
Posted 1 year ago # -
I dont believe for one microsecond that the OP had any other intention than to get a cheap giggle. I'm not offended btw. The attempt at high-minded justification by the OP and others is funnier.
Posted 1 year ago # -
but there isn't a correlation between softness and sexual preference, so it's more inaccurate than offensive
I think it is the inaccuracy that causes the offence – most slang terms for homosexuals allude to softness and effeminancygiven the way footballers dive and make a scene they seem to bring derision upon themselves
I agree but this can be done without using a derogatory term for a gay person clearly. Zokes seems to have a wide array of insults to hand
Zokes unfortunate use of language might be ill considered but if woofter by association with "gay"
It is not associated with gay it is only a derogatory slang term for a gay person - it has no other meaning
Dont think I have really committed the slippery slope but lets not get side tracked hereIt's mainly because of your comments that it's already over 100 posts..
are you thanking me there for giving you your moment in the limelight with a spade?
Mainly, because you'll loose, again
Yes you will beat me to a bloody pulp with your cutting use of language, logic and reasoning so can I just surrender now big man?
now go and annoy the aussies about the cricket
Posted 1 year ago # -
toys so when I insult your wife I do nothing until you decide how to react then - despoite using unpleasnt names I am still doing nothing it is just you who decides what my words mean ...interesting idea on communication. I wonder why I bother to construct sentences if you choose what they mean.
Posted 1 year ago # -
are you thanking me there for giving you your moment in the limelight with a spade?
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm no expert on the social distribution of pansyness
rightness or wrongness, this is my nomination for quote of the week
Posted 1 year ago # -
As someone who works closely with people with learning disabilities - I can't see why someone would assume they are 'stupid'. That is all I am upset about.
Posted 1 year ago # -
You need to put this on hold till tomorrow Zokes ia abed with his cocoa now.
Posted 1 year ago # -
King Prawns = Sexist.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Imagine just how outraged I would be if they were a smaller weedier version called Queen prawns eh
MORON
Posted 1 year ago # -
All this stated by a man who likes CRICKET!
Nowt wrong with the soft thud of leather on wood eh Max?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Belgian Bun = Racist.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I wonder why I bother to construct sentences if you choose what they mean.
I think you are confusing meaning with emotional response. I decide how to respond to your meaning. If you communicate effeciently I'm sure your meaning will be clear eg:
JY "Your wife is a dirty slut"
toys response
a) "What! You lowlife scum!" Smack.
b) "Yeah I know what a score, fancy a go on her while I watch?"
c) "Ha ha. Your lame attempts at insuklt backed up by your twisted logic and cliched rhetoric are basically pathetic and we couldn't be offended no matter how hard you try."The meaning is the same, the offence or not is my choice.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Morning all...
now go and annoy the aussies about the cricket
I can't - they're all pretending that they don't like it any more - almost as amusing as some of the brain-dead comments from the usual suspects on this thread...
It is not associated with gay it is only a derogatory slang term for a gay person
Totally incorrect. YOU only associate it with a gay person, by virtue of the fact that YOU assiciate being wimpish and effeminate with being gay. I think you'll find, by carrying those predudices, it's YOU who's being bigotted.
Yes you will beat me to a bloody pulp with your cutting use of language, logic and reasoning so can I just surrender now big man?
No need to really - you're quite capable of demonstrating how little you use your brain before using a keyboard without my help.
are you thanking me there for giving you your moment in the limelight with a spade?
Whilst aspiring to having long threads on STW may be your ultimate goal in life; I'm normally just happy with posting a few mediocre photos, commentating on the cricket, and demonstrating just how wrong or right TJ's arguments are. Still, I hope you've enjoyed this 'entertainment'.
Imagine just how outraged I would be if they were a smaller weedier version called Queen prawns eh
MORONC'mon Elfinwatsit - tell him just how offended you were when I called you one just before you were banned last time...
Posted 1 year ago # -
An excellent point that using woofter is a sign of acceptance of homosexuality on your part and only people who object are the anti gay ones - I assume this works with the n word to black people and using paki as well. Presumably if i say it to one of that group and they get offended they are really a racist
You have actually stolen someone argument from this thread that was used against you re LD s and moron as well Sherlock. I am awe struck by yourplagarismbrain power.
I know you have better things to do hence when you got up and started posting you did so on this thread first out of all stw even the cricket one
Was it even on the front page?
As you want to be one of the great insulters, rather than debaters, may I refer you to the work of Zulu-eleven he is much superior to you at this.Posted 1 year ago # -
Clearly you have been up too long junky - even by your standards, that last post made absolutely no sense.
Posted 1 year ago # -
made sense to me.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I prefer wendyball, just because a bunch of grown men immediately start behaving like ten year old girls
So being sexist now are we?
Only if you wish to see it that way. Don't myself, but I'm not one of the professionally offended.
That's pretty rich coming from an Aussie, anyway.Posted 1 year ago # -
That's pretty rich coming from an Aussie, anyway.
Who's the Aussie? If you're referring to me, I think you'll find in Monopoly terms, I've passed go, collected $200, and am 'just visiting'...
Posted 1 year ago # -
That's pretty rich coming from an Aussie, anyway.
Oh, and racsist too...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Narrow-minded, woman-hating country in hypocracy shocker links up with oldman stuck in a different era...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Junkyard I'm a little dissapointed that you haven't come back to my meaning/response argument. Come on this is supposed to be STW where's your fight gone?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Strewth!
All pretty rich from a country that gave us Julian (boy am I strange) Assange the founder of Wiki Geeks....
Posted 1 year ago # -
Narrow-minded, woman-hating country in hypocracy shocker links up with oldman stuck in a different era...
Yup - got it in one...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Clearly you have been up too long junky - even by your standards, that last post made absolutely no sense.
The last throw of a desperate man who cannot argue his point succesfully acting confused - remember you keep saying I am the dim one
Toys - sorry sidetracked and actually I have thought about what you have said since reading - You raise some interesting point and I [genuinely] see your point re the listener making a choice on response re your scenario. I find it to be somewhat of a paradox though
Someone means to offend you using offensive language but it is your choice to be offended or not seems odd - not sure it would be legal view re defamation /slander etc.
I think part of it would be that the statement would be said in acontext with some style - ie if response a is elicited then it is more likely io said it in a screaming contorted angry manner, b in my best leslie Philips voice DING DONG and c would be offensive banter between mates.
I do get yourpoint though and [logically] I can see it as reasonable if misguided/wrong mm notsure of the rigth word there.
It reminded me of the Buddha and just how far I have fallen
One day Buddha was walking through a village. A very angry and rude young man came up and began insulting him. "You have no right teaching others," he shouted. "You are as stupid as everyone else. You are nothing but a fake."Buddha was not upset by these insults. Instead he asked the young man "Tell me, if you buy a gift for someone, and that person does not take it, to whom does the gift belong?"
The man was surprised to be asked such a strange question and answered, "It would belong to me, because I bought the gift."
The Buddha smiled and said, "That is correct. And it is exactly the same with your anger. If you become angry with me and I do not get insulted, then the anger falls back on you. You are then the only one who becomes unhappy, not me. All you have done is hurt yourself."
"If you want to stop hurting yourself, you must get rid of your anger and become loving instead. When you hate others, you yourself become unhappy. But when you love others, everyone is happy."
You can reasonably claim to not understand this somewhat waffling and unclear response but I am still considering what you have said but yes I have/am in the process of changing my mind reconsidering my position
STW'er changing mind SHOCKER - not sure how much I will change but yes I see your point up to a point.
There are still many words I would not usePosted 1 year ago # -
There are still many words I would not use
Me too, but that's my choice. I still don't support any suppression of others use of "offensive" terms, even if I wouldn't use them.
Anyway it is a challenging problem..
Posted 1 year ago # -
I am not saying I would ban them either but perhaps we could discuss the issues around using them - why use a derogatory terms for a homosexual if you do not have a negative view of homosexuals? Why use the n word if you are not a racist etcI
I find it paradoxical that I can decide to be rude and offensive and use words solely for this effect BUT you get to decide if it is actually rude and offensive not me. I see your point re this but it still seems odd/wrong
Indeed a challenging probelm. I have debated this a few times you made me think/refelct/ change
ChapeauPosted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
