Originally posted by redbadgerI feel a kindred spirit with Randolph, I feel he should be initiated into the Assassins creed of twirly villainous moustaches, but I need to get Mrs Robbie to feel my bum to make sure I'm not dreaming, did he really call Suzianne out for being the ad hominem queen of the universe? Yeah he said it, dudes now a legend, we should befriend and initiate him into our guild.
bummer just shaved mine off.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHe would fit perfectly, but that is a compliment for neither you nor him.
I feel a kindred spirit with Randolph, I feel he should be initiated into the Assassins creed of twirly villainous moustaches, but I need to get Mrs Robbie to feel my bum to make sure I'm not dreaming, did he really call Suzianne out for being the ad hominem queen of the universe? Yeah he said it, dudes now a legend, we should befriend and initiate him into our guild.
You'd have to entice him away from his current mentor/sidekick/alter ego, though.
But I guess when you're already evil, it's easy to get other, lesser evils to do your bidding. And even others who are not exactly evil, only stupid.
04 Aug 14
Originally posted by SuzianneHe would become a legendary member of the guild of villainous moustaches although I suspect that his villainous streak might prove too much to form a kindred spirit. If you had a bushy tail and a degree in cunning from Foxford you could join, just wax your legs and curl the moustache and you'll do alright.
He would fit perfectly, but that is a compliment for neither you nor him.
You'd have to entice him away from his current mentor/sidekick/alter ego, though.
But I guess when you're already evil, it's easy to get other, lesser evils to do your bidding. And even others who are not exactly evil, only stupid.
04 Aug 14
Originally posted by SuzianneOh come on, are you two seriously trying to start up the same argument, the only difference being this time around you are using a different set of 'victims'?
Exactly.
This all started when robbie said:
"Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its tough being straight in a gay world, i know, Ive struggled with it for years."
... and you responded with:
"You know this makes NO sense, right?"
Unless I'm mistaken robbie was simply pointing out the folly of people who paint themselves as victims, and then convince others to repeat the same mantra. Another way to do a substitution test (to test the validity of these kind of statements) is to reverse the so called victims with their (implied) victimizers. For you to say it makes no sense validates robbies point... because it makes no sense either way it's said.
Whites are no more (or less) safe in a black world than blacks are in a white world. Anyone playing a race card is being a racist. I don't believe you or Tabs are racists, so why the race baiting? I'm not taking the bait this time because it would be the same thing all over again, with FMF jumping in to bore you with his pre-programmed propaganda inspired insights... what brain dead zombie here wants to see more of that?
...oops, I just answered my own question
04 Aug 14
Originally posted by lemon limeCome on, now. You realize you're treading into FMF-style argument here?
Oh come on, are you two seriously trying to start up the same argument, the only difference being this time around you are using a [b]different set of 'victims'?
This all started when robbie said:
"Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its tough being straight in a gay world, i know, Ive struggled with it for years."
... and you responded wit ...[text shortened]... zombie here wants to see more of that?
...oops, I just answered my own question[/b]
Here is the statement you are freaking out about: (To which I agreed.)
"I fully agree and would like to add a parallel of being white in a black world is much easier than being black in a white world."
Starting your argument against, you say this:
"Whites are no more (or less) safe in a black world than blacks are in a white world."
You CAN see that these statements are not congruent, right? This is the way FMF argues, and it must have rubbed off on you. Misdirection.
As to robbie's original statement, the reason I said "You know this makes NO sense, right?" is that he had it remarkably backward. As I said in a later post, "My entire point was that being straight in a "gay world", one would find immeasurably less intolerance and bias than a gay person does in this "straight world"."
And yeah, this is when you jumped in, threw everything off the rails and the thread went to hell in a handbasket.
Robbie rarely demonstrates that he even has the intelligence of a frog, so saying that he was "simply pointing out the folly of people who paint themselves as victims" is laughable at best.
And oh, by the way, racism doesn't suddenly disappear just because you proclaim that it doesn't exist, or even if you turn it around and claim that those claiming racism are somehow racist themselves. Same with misogyny, and same with homophobia.
05 Aug 14
2 edits
Originally posted by SuzianneYou CAN see that these statements are not congruent, right?
Come on, now. You realize you're treading into FMF-style argument here?
Here is the statement you are freaking out about: (To which I agreed.)
"I fully agree and would like to add a parallel of being white in a black world is much easier than being black in a white world."
Starting your argument against, you say this:
"Whites are no more (or le ...[text shortened]... se claiming racism are somehow racist themselves. Same with misogyny, and same with homophobia.
If not congruent then how are they parallel?
As to robbie's original statement, the reason I said "You know this makes NO sense, right?" is that he had it remarkably backward.
I doubt robbie was being serious. It seemed to me he was simply making a point about ridiculous assertions by putting forth an absurd statement... illustrating absurdity by being absurd.
Sorry Suzi, I don't know if it was a trap meant for you (or perhaps meant for FMF) or if he was simply tossing that out to see who would say what. All I know for sure is you turned it around to make an equally absurd statement. Your statement seemed to me to be a mirror image of his, with the victim becoming the victimizer and visa versa.
Unlike many people who play the race card, I'm not inclined to believe people who play the victim card are victims... in fact I think they are anything but victims.
05 Aug 14
Originally posted by SuzianneAnd oh, by the way, racism doesn't suddenly disappear just because you proclaim that it doesn't exist, or even if you turn it around and claim that those claiming racism are somehow racist themselves. Same with misogyny, and same with homophobia.
Come on, now. You realize you're treading into FMF-style argument here?
Here is the statement you are freaking out about: (To which I agreed.)
"I fully agree and would like to add a parallel of being white in a black world is much easier than being black in a white world."
Starting your argument against, you say this:
"Whites are no more (or le ...[text shortened]... se claiming racism are somehow racist themselves. Same with misogyny, and same with homophobia.
Where did I proclaim it doesn't exist? I've seen it first hand and have experienced it for myself.
But this doesn't mean I can't see how some people will take advantage of others problems by pretending to be on their side... and as soon as befriending you is no longer an advantage for them they'll suddenly disappear into the background. Honest hatred is easier for me to deal with than phony friendship... at least with honest hatred I don't have to guess (and take the chance on being wrong) where someone is coming from.
So am I supposed to believe there are women who do not hate men because there isn't a fancy word for it? And if homophobia is really a problem (fear of homosexuals) then why have I never heard of heterophobia? If I said you fear me because you disagree with me would you believe that explanation? I suppose you would have to if a majority of people could be convinced that it was true...