[Closed] WTF - Naked rambler jailed for 5 months?

Rightio then - why don't you type out, nice and clearly so everyone at the back can hear, why exactly you think that legally requiring women to wear less clothes than they would like to would be in their best interest?

And whilst you're at it, you can also explain why you agree with the naked rambler being forced to wear more clothes than he desires.

Maybe he's a clothes communist seeking to redress a blatant imbalance?

Read back, Graham S, I have typed my views out clearly. Tactics noted on this thread:

Over familiarity: often used to show contempt or talk down to someone. "Rightio then..." .

Insult: "supercilious fool", "moron", "tosh" "xenophobe" intended to rile/antagonise and thus provoke a reaction.

Misquoting and putting words in someone's mouth: lie about what someone has said in order to distort their argument.

Insult: "supercilious fool", "moron", "tosh" "xenophobe" intended to rile/antagonise and thus provoke a reaction.

Actually, I think they all accurately describe a person who types stuff like this:

An interesting choice of insult to throw at someone who is running rings around you and tripping you up with your own preconceptions

and this:

As you seem to have a fixation on Muslim dress and the Burka in particular then I think you should know that the Burka is the visible tip of an iceberg of religious subjugation and human rights abuses, Junkyard. The kinds of abuses that include a 'crime spree' of thousands of casees of genital mutilations in Germany (the only European country of seen figures for), forced marriages... .

and this:

You are putting words in my mouth, Graham S, Zokes and Junkyard. I suggest you stick to analysing what I type not what you think I'm thinking.

Oh, and you missed "deluded", which is probably the most accurate word to describe you

Read back, Graham S, I have typed my views out clearly.

And then denied them when quoted back to you. So perhaps not as clear as you imagine.

Over familiarity: often used to show contempt or talk down to someone. "Rightio then..." .

It was the former. Apologies for any confusion. Matey.

Misquoting and putting turds in someone's mouse

I don't think anyone needs to misquote you.

Over familiarity: often used to show contempt or talk down to someone. "Rightio then..." .

Insult: "supercilious fool", "moron", "tosh" "xenophobe" intended to rile/antagonise and thus provoke a reaction.

Which exactly do you object to as you wear them all well. In fact they cover you from head to toe and i am offended by this 😉

Misquoting

I have typed my views out clearly

So I'm "deluded" now too, have you been following the news, guys? Well Zokes, Junkyard and Graham S, I suggest you move to Saudi, you'd all be much happier as you wouldn't have to put up with a guy who likes to see everybody's face and thinks the naked rambler should wear a loin cloth in public if he wishes to leave prison. I'm happy living in a place where I have to wear a T-shirt in the town centre and some religious and political symbols are banned in some places.

You want tolerance for the naked rambler but have demonstrated a degree of intolerance towards a fellow STWer that demonstrates why the naked rambler is in prison. This thread is all yours, enjoy.

NO we want tolerance for all in terms of choosing what lothes they do or do not wear. You want to force people to wear the clothes you want the to do [ apparently forcing them to do as you say rather than what they want to do is the only way to free them from oppression] we dont want to do that to anyone
The saudi stuff is a poor straw man but you do excel at them

have demonstrated a degree of intolerance

you cannot spout what you do and then argue for tolerance

have you been following the news, guys?

Yes and I fail to see what this has to do with Kate Middleton's Royal funbags.

I suggest you move to Saudi

Yes, well known for its tolerant attitude. Exactly what we are calling for 🙄

You want tolerance for the naked rambler but have demonstrated a degree of intolerance towards a fellow STWer

I see, to be truly tolerant we must tolerate your intolerance.

I'm not sure that's quite how it works.

You want tolerance for the naked rambler but have demonstrated a degree of intolerance towards a fellow STWer that demonstrates why the naked rambler is in prison.

I'm happy to demonstrate intolerance towards xenophobic bigots. If that makes them take their views away and perhaps consider changing them in a flounce, then so much the better.

I'm not happy about intolerance towards people who are doing noone any harm by either wearing "too many" or "too few" clothes. That's their personal choice and noone has any right to tell them to do otherwise.

zimbo - Member

People have been banned for less than this tosh.

A bloke called Gough was jailed for something far less offensive. [b]Although I'm biased, because I just want to see his c*ck.[/b]

Posted 56 minutes ago # Report-Post

I knew it!

Anyway it's not women in Burquas that you need to worry about; it's women in false beards...

[IMG] [/IMG]

What if the SS can we trust them then?

For the first time in eight years I've reported a post on STW:

Is calling someone a "moron", "supercilious fool" and then "xenophobic bigot" going too far for the new play nice forum?

I'm not happy about intolerance towards people who are doing noone any harm by either wearing "too many" or "too few" clothes. That's their personal choice and noone has any right to tell them to do otherwise.

Xenophobia, the fear of people who are different from one's self.

A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own or intolerant of people of different political views, ethnicity, race, class, religion, profession, sexuality or gender.

The cap appears to fit.

I have to say that if I'd posted some of the xenophobic nonsense that Eduakator has in the past I'd maybe be asking for all of my posting history to be deleted.....

For the first time in eight years I've reported a post on STW

Well done. Though you may want to check the wording of this Forum Rule before you go reporting posts Edukator:

No posts which, in the Moderators opinion, are likely to cause offence to either an individual, or group, whatever their gender, sexual inclination or ethnicity.

I have to say that if I'd posted some of the xenophobic nonsense that Eduakator has in the past I'd maybe be asking for all of my posting history to be deleted.....

I believe he did, not so long ago...

I'm a male, caucasian, heterosexual Graham S. Calling me a "supercilious fool", "moron" and "xznophobic bigot" seems pretty offensive.

Seems pretty accurate to me.

"xznophobic bigot"

There appears to be general consensus on this one given your posts here, and your history

"supercilious fool"

Accurately described your mentality when you had the brainfart about running rings

"moron"

Wasn't actually me. It was quite funny though...

edukator, I want to be able to side with you, as it's clear that you are well meaning..
you wish to help empower oppressed women, and to protect their human rights, an admirable thing..

But you are simply regurgitating Liberal targeted propaganda campaigns, and right-wing doctrine, empowering nobody and fuelling religious hatred..
Your studenty pseudo-intellectual idealism makes you the perfect target for those wishing to legitimise western military campaigns in the middle east.. to desensitise the west to the deaths of these 'savage' people.. and your limited understanding actually makes you their tool..
and you're in France I believe, where intolerance is more of an everyday political point scorer.. it must be very confusing for you..

Here today though, your skewed arguments have fallen flat, and you've not even enough intellect to admit your mistake and attempt to work out a better take on the situation..

I know that you didn't do well at uni, and that you're trying to fit in where you are with some seriously right-on edgy politicising, but there has to come a point when you need to ask whether due to your inadequacies, you are actually becoming a part of the problem instead part of the solution..

ouch

2 points to Gryffindor, Master Yunki.

I'm still curious about the misquoting, that's the sort of thing that would be very easy to prove, [i]if[/i] it were true.

I scored 142 in the last IQ test I did, "moron" is highly inaccurate.

It's the playground-ganging-up-and-silly-insults syndrome that is the bain of forums and UK based bike forums in particular. Is it acceptable or isn't it?

[quote=Edukator ]I scored 142 in the last IQ test I did, "moron" is highly inaccurate.
It's the playground-ganging-up-and-silly-insults syndrome that is the bain of forums and UK based bike forums in particular. Is it acceptable or isn't it?
Do you find you get "ganged-up on" all all the forums you visit then?

I know that you didn't do well at uni

A 2:1 back when it meant something, Yunki. More insult and character assassination but still no justification for people being able to cover their faces in public or indeed walk around naked.

I know that you didn't do well at uni, and that you're trying to fit in where you are with some seriously right-on edgy politicising, but there has to come a point when you need to ask whether due to your inadequacies, you are actually becoming a part of the problem instead part of the solution..

Sorry, but that is actually bloody rude,and more than a little nasty.

stealth edit. can't be bothered with this idiot. (not you duckman)

I scored 142 in the last IQ test I did, "moron" is highly inaccurate.

I said it was funny. Plenty of others agreed.

The remainder do unfortunately appear to be somewhat more factual when applied to the character you portray on here. That you're now alluding to having these issues on other forums does appear to highlight the common link. You.

christ on a bike..

see.. I told you.. I should have listened to my own advice

Sorry, but that is actually bloody rude,and more than a little nasty.

maybe so duckman, it depends very much on your sensibilities though.. I'm not actually a particularly nice person all of the time if I'm honest..

Perhaps I was too direct, it wouldn't be the first time.. I was just trying a little tough love

laters all.. 🙄

still no justification for people being able to cover their faces

Actually there was loads - you just chose to ignore it completely.

ganging-up

You have a strong viewpoint that the majority of posters on this thread disagree with. We're not "ganging-up", you just have unpopular views.

silly-insults

I think most of them have been quite restrained. Not sure I condone "moron" or "fool", but your views could certainly be described as xenophobic, supercilious and bigoted. That's not really an insult, it's just a subjective description of how your views are interpreted.

Perhaps less offensive views would generate less offence? Have you tried covering them with a metaphorical loin cloth? 😀

Anyway, I'm sure the mods are watching this thread with interest, so I'd suggest everyone reigning it in a little before the banhammer swings.

but still no justification for people being able to cover their faces in public or indeed walk around naked.

Moreover on the former, no non-racially motivated reasons from you as to why it needs justifying. And no reasons at all for the latter.

Just a pity that IQ apparently has no bearing on one's self awareness or common sense.

Not often, Druihd, I've pointed out that it's happening when others have been victims and sometimes been on the receiving end. I was under the impression the mods were trying to apply a "play nice" policy on here so I'm intrigued to see what they do (if anything).

Is there room for civil discussion on STW or is it OK for someone to get character assasinated becasue he/she has a slightly different point of view (it's not as if I'm saying anything different to what is written into British (loin cloth) or French (le voile) law here.

Just a pity that IQ apparently has no bearing on one's self awareness or common sense.

Your posts just continue to be a series of insults, Zokes, just as you and Z-11 used to do with TJ. I'm showing a great deal of awareness, pointing out the tactics you're using. It's common sense to pull out of the discussion and look at the tactics being used when the discussion has degenerated into a series of insults.

Not sure I condone "moron" or "fool"

In the gamut of possible insults one could take offence at, are these really such major players?

I'm in no way condoning ad hominem either, it's pointless, lazy debating, but if I got offended every time someone called me a fool I'd never get out of bed of a morning.

You're a fool for getting out of bed of a morning.

Is there room for civil discussion on STW

That depends a lot on what's being discussed. When multiple posters agree that a user is being supercilious, appears to express xenophobic views, and comes across as very bigoted towards a minority group, perhaps that just becomes a character description, even if it does appear to be unfortunately truthful.

It's a very long time since I've seen anyone dropping their IQ into an internet argument, that's proper old school...

Though, you might think that a genius would be able to provide evidence of the misquoting he claims he's been subjected to.