BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:02 AM

Sorry Stu, beat you to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:04 AM

Musket, You now damn well Ake wouldn't be up before a judge for anything he has said If he said it to Elton John's face and if Elton was her majesty's minister of Justice.

This thing you do where you puff up his wrongdoings to comic extremes so that you can rant about him, is getting more than a little tired and tedious.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:04 AM

where is my head.......aha! found it!

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:07 AM

Wrong, wrong, wrong, Musket. It is only when ideas, right or wrong, are exposed in the commons that they come under the scrutiny of average folks. Your philosophy shows a lack of trust, and a lack of respect, for the ability of average folks to discern whether something is good, bad, or somewhere in between. I have full faith that average folks are decent and intelligent people fully able to discern right from wrong. Ake has every right to espouse his opinion, as well as bear the consequences for them. If he was being derogatory towards a gay person, I would likely censure him. If he is expressing his opinion about the gay lifestyle, based on his beliefs, I would challenge those beliefs.

A couple of hundred years ago we had a little dustup with old flinty. One of the issues became our First Amendment in our Bill of Rights. It basically says that while I may disagree with your opinions, I will defend unto death your right to have them.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:17 AM

"Be nice to everybody - especially yourself! And how to you be nice to yourself? By being nasty to everyone else! "

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:20 AM

Even now there is a band of gay ninja somersaulting and screaming through the heather towards Ake...

He will bear the consequences of espousing his opinion. Gay pride will be avenged!

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Stu
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:20 AM

"Sorry Stu, beat you to it."

I was trumped fair and square!

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:23 AM

I have full faith that average folks are decent and intelligent people fully able to discern right from wrong.

Mark Twain, Kurt Vonnegut, H.L. Mencken, Charles Pierce and a host of others who have experience with the real world would disagree with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Stu
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:25 AM

"I have full faith that average folks are decent and intelligent people fully able to discern right from wrong."

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Stu
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:29 AM

"I have full faith that average folks are decent and intelligent people fully ab

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Stu
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:54 AM

Bloody hell . . . I'm working as well as following these threads and my machine got jammed as my 3D software pinched all my available RAM and the whole shebang came to a stuttering halt, hence the fussy posts. Apologies for the clutter.

What I was trying to say with my not-to-subtle link (and would have typed under had the gremlins not got in) is that sometimes decent, perfectly intelligent people can be wrong; very, very badly wrong.

We have a duty to oppose extremism and bigotry in all it's forms, and whilst some of the tactics here are rather direct, the tactics of some of those provoking these reactions are far more insidious, using misrepresentation and deception in support of their arguments, all the time sneering at the work of honest, decent people.

Just because someone uses nice language and appears meek in the face of outcry does't mean they're not worse than those whose outrage is articulated in a way that offends some people, often selectively.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 11:24 AM

No Mick, sorry, but I think you have it wrong. I will ask the same question that I asked Joe on the thread you referred to. In the situation where person A says "I think that gays are perverts and should be deprived of their human rights" and person B responds "You are a twat for saying that" which viewpoint would you uphold? Person A has the etiquette of debate right but surely person B has every right to respond in the way he did. Or have I got it wrong?

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 11:45 AM

I would just tell them what was wrong with their statements.
Name calling just invites a response in kind.
My way forces them to try and defend their views and further expose their bigotry or makes them confront it.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 12:08 PM

My way forces them to try and defend their views and further expose their bigotry or makes them confront it.

Ever try looking in the mirror, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 01:11 PM

Remember I am a fuckwit Greg.
You will have to explain what you mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:01 PM

I mean you're a fuckwit.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:28 PM

Ding! Ding! Ding!.......I think we have a winner.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: gnu
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:31 PM

Now that's funny. Far far far from the truth but funny.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Janie
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:42 PM

Dave, you were addressing Mick and I surely ain't Mick, but hope you don't mind if I chime in. In the example you offered, it seems to me you are asking that apples be compared to oranges. And maybe avocados as I am not entirely certain what "twat" refers to in the UK.

Fyi,in the USA twat is generally used as a dehumanizing, objectifying term -it derogatorily refers to a woman's vagina. While I have my limits I don't get too hung up about folks being entirely PC in the language they use, I simply note what it continues to reflect in our unconscious culture that always includes biases. Just noting that any term employed and applied to insult another person also is likely to reflect an unconscious bias about whole classes of people.

Re your question, I would disagree with both of and not uphold either viewpoint, but it would still be about addressing apples and oranges. I strongly disagree with the the particular beliefs of person A. I also strongly disagree with the belief of person B that because some one holds some beliefs to which I strongly object that I am qualified to pass judgement on the human value of that person or to assume that those beliefs sum up the entire person.

Think about the difference between "that is a foolish idea" and "You are a fool."

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:06 PM

To bray od nof to bray?

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:06 PM

'Think about the difference between "that is a foolish idea" and "You are a fool."'

Some folks have that trifecta wrapped up.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:09 PM

Oops
to bray, or not to bray, that is the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:04 PM

If you want an example of decent discussion, go to the "BS: Shh.. Don't let them hear you.. " thread and begin reading with Joe Offer's post of 03 April at 04:19 AM. Note how Joe, for,the most part, responds with respect and attempts to keep the discussion on the issues at hand. He does it despite the provocations laid out. If you want an example of decent discussion, go to the "BS: Shh.. Don't let them hear you.. " thread and begin reading with Joe Offer's post of 03 April at 04:19 AM. Note how Joe, for,the most part, responds with respect and attempts to keep the discussion on the issues at hand. He does it despite the provocations laid out. Note how certain provocateurs continue to try and make it about people instead of ideas. I agree with Joe, for example, about ake. I think he is as wrong as he can be with his views on homosexuality, but he tries to express them based on his belief system. I agree with Joe, for example, about ake. I think he is as wrong as he can be with his views on homosexuality, but he tries to express them based on his belief system.

*yawn*

Well, you see, respectful Big Mick, you start a thread that invites people to consider which of those among us might be "Pricks". So you want to make people more respectful by being disrespectful, huh? Your "respectful" mate Joe has suggested that I and several others should resort to shrinks (because we rattle him when we express disagreement with his somewhat deluded notions, not the least of which is his support for an out-and-out science-denying creationist). In this latest post you are supporting a rabid homophobe because you think he's being honest. Cor, that's all right then! Yet, in all this thread, neither you nor your supposed allies have had the balls to name names. Well I challenge you once and for all to name names. But be careful, old boy, because some of the names I suspect you might want to name would be very sorely misrepresented by your statement "Note how certain provocateurs continue to try and make it about people instead of ideas." Yes we attack people but we attack people who come here and drag the place down with their thoroughly nasty ideas. You only have to look at some of the people here that you're giving succour to in this thread to make you, I hope, feel rather uncomfortable about what you appear to be trying to do. You are bollocking right-minded people who call very nasty people names yet defending people with very nasty ideas. Hmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:26 PM

Nice try, Steve. Keep practicing and you might one day make it into the big leagues. But to do so, you will have to stop making assertions out of context, such as you did about Joe Offer and the creationist.

Does the term "dismissive" mean anything to you. You certainly are good at it with folks you disagree with.

Keep it up and you will have to adjust your hat size up a notch.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:34 PM

is the asshat a donkeys head hat, like in A Midsummer Night's Dream, or is it a hat consisting of a bum, or is it a dunce's cap......?

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:34 PM

Yet, in all this thread, neither you nor your supposed allies have had the balls to name names.

Steve Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:40 PM

Yeah but Wacko, you haven't even got any balls to begin with.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:46 PM

But to do so, you will have to stop making assertions out of context, such as you did about Joe Offer and the creationist.

Christ on a bloody bike, if you're a member of the Big League then I'll stay where I am, thanks. You start a thread that would be unworthy even of a Wacko and you start coming the high and mighty? As for the quoted remark here, I have taken absolutely nothing out of context. Joe's gentle defence of pete is all over recent threads. The only way you'll prove me wrong on that is to rush back and do what you mods do best: a nice bit of selective deleting when things get hot.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:47 PM

"If the asshat fits, put it on" seems like good sauce here, Steve. And if you think I am uncomfortable, it only shows that you know little of me.

While you are searching out "dismissive" you might also consider looking up "self examination". You aren't, by any chance, a proctologist are you? It would make the latter a matter of "physician, heal thyself." Oh dear ..... I have resorted to making a joke at your expense. I probably won't post for a while, have to go to confession.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:54 PM

Yeah, you do that, big league big boy. And don't forget to tell Father how you think you can get people to be respectful by being disrespectful! But do keep it up. Your patina is wearing off. At least I haven't got one to begin with.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:55 PM

If the thread is unworthy of a wacko, in your estimation, then the fact that you are all over speaks volumes about you. I rest my case, your honor.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: BrendanB
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 05:22 PM

Right then, Steve Shaw only attacks people who manifest nasty ideas, or so he says. Well, I do not believe that I have promulgated a single nasty idea in any posting I have made to this site but he has certainly attacked me. I loathe homophobia, I find creationism to be irrational nonsense and I am blessed with friends both gay and straight, believers and non-believers and various points in between. It is true that I am a practising Catholic but that is my business, no-one else's. One friend in particular is an avowed atheist and delights in trying to wind me up but we never feel the need to hurl abuse at each other. He's a good man and his humanity means more to me than any belief he holds.
According to his oft stated protestations Steve Shaw is never rattled by other posters but is successful in rattling them. How does he know? Surely he can only draw that conclusion by their responses. By the same token I have no doubt that he gets severely rattled. In fact, his last response to me was extremely offensive. Unfortunately, it was removed (I imagine because it was deemed unacceptable, but I had no hand in that decision). I fear he doth protest too much.
Joe Offer has never said that he accepts creationism or homophobia, quite the reverse, but he has said he respects the way in which certain people present their views. For the record, I have tremendous respect for Joe Offer, he demonstrates a compassion and courtesy that is in short supply on this site and I believe that his approach is far more likely to impact on others than Steve Shaw's permanent subtext of 'I'm right, I'm right and you're stupid'.
While I am at it, I regret Musket's occasional lapses into obscenity and ad hominem attacks but I respect his position on pretty much everything he addresses. He comes across to me as a well-informed, thoughtful man. I have enjoyed every one of Jack Blandiver's posts - how could you not? I suspect I would greatly enjoy meeting him.
Finally, coming back to the unlovely Shaw, I note that he has vaunted his professional credentials on more than one occasion. I came across several inspectors in my 38 year career in education, most of them were neither use nor ornament and it was generally held that they were failed teachers. This may be a vile calumny but I would never have employed one in any of my schools. Yes, I know it's a cheap shot but I just thought I would find out what it's like down in The SS sewer.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 05:32 PM

Besides that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 05:37 PM

Well, BrendanB, that reasoned and civil rebuke of Mr. Shaw has permanently banned you from membership in the Black Belt Obstreperous Pricks Club.

And spot on......

Mick

PS: I agree on Musket. He is a fella I would like to meet, fascinating takes on things.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 06:09 PM

"And, there was the one about the preacher who was converted by his own sermon."

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 06:20 PM

Poor old Christian Brendan! I note your recourse to deleted stuff that we can't check (and which I can't even remember) as evidence of your victimisation. Well we can all do that. Your post, in its final remarks, is as nasty as thing as I've ever posted meself, if not even nastier. And I know that my fellow Messiah, if he can muster the energy to read this tedious stuff, will resist the urge to cash delightfully in on this joint attempt by yerself and Big DMick to, er, divide 'n' rule. But good luck to ye in that endeavour!

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 06:50 PM

"Messiah"? You reveal more and more of your view of yourself and your real problem every time you post. Why didn't you just say that you suffer from Messiah envy? I would have happily started a thread on how praising you would save us all.

No more time to waste on you.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 07:50 PM

"No more time to waste on me" you lying, non-obstreperous non-prick (hey, non-prick: I like it!)?? You posted this at 6.50, telling me you have no more time to waste on me, then you post another load of shite to me eleven minutes later on another thread! You can't resist it! You're a dyed-in-the-wool Wacko-ite! Go on, Mick babe, delete it and prove me wrong! Hurry up, the world is reading you! Bwahahaha!

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 08:19 PM

Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:40 PM

Yeah but Wacko, you haven't even got any balls to begin with. <<<

The obstreperousness is annoying, the stupidity, hilarious!

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 08:35 PM

Why, I'm glad I cheered you up so, Wackers. Nighty night.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 08:53 PM

as shylock said in the merchant of Vienna, your asshats are all in supposition....

and I think we can all take a lesson from that.

in the meantime - by your fruits ye shall be known - are you going to buy my download - or are you content to see a fellow mudcatter fall into the slough of despond....?

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 09:14 PM

I need a link, Al. Always happy to help out.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Janie
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 09:32 PM

Link above the line, Mick. I have a couple of Al's CD's. Off the beaten path, and quite wonderful.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 03:02 AM

Keep this up and some of us would by the logic of argument have to apologise for stridently standing up to homophobia and bigotry.





Ain't going to happen.

I don't have to answer for my sins. Not having any beliefs or religious club membership , I don't have sins to answer for.

I stand by my vitriol towards hatred and in my attempts to handle reality rather than principle, will always, always, always shout it down and expose it where I see it.

By the way Jack. A bloke posted on a website a "fact" that a pub refused to serve soldiers in order not to offend Muslims. He was up on front of a judge for inflammatory lies in order to invite hatred. Free speech can go as far as opinion. The "shouting Fire! in a crowded theatre" example has been given already in this thread.

People can have all the opinions they wish but to print lies about a section of community in order to vilify them isn't "old fashioned," it is wrong.

You can make all the excuses you wish but whilst I would accept opinion and old men struggling to come to terms with a better society than they were born into, they have no right in perpetuating ancient wrongs.

I might be giving the worm more respect than some of his defenders in that I am accepting his words rather than protecting his mental state.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Stu
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 04:55 AM

"And maybe avocados as I am not entirely certain what "twat" refers to in the UK."

I wouldn't get too hung up on the use of the word "twat". Although an insult it has other meanings too:

1) As an insult: "It's your round, you daft twat"

2) A lady's whotsit.

3) To get drunk: "I would have stayed for last orders but the soddin' vicar was twatted again and started singing "Jesus I have Promised" in the bogs again"

4) To hit someone: "He went on and on about MU winning the champions league last year so I twitted him".

Lovely!

Shakespeare would have loved this fine contribution to our language:

Profanisaurus

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 05:01 AM

Thanks, Janie. It is pretty much the answer I would have expected from any reasonable person but I would still like to hear it from Mick. You see, I actually agree that neither viewpoint is right. I believe they should both be deleted or, at least, treated in the same way. Even oranges, apples and avocados all have something in common. But this does not seem to be happening here at Mudcat. Person A is being defended all the time while person B has threads like this created about them. By a moderator. Just seems a bit unfair to be but, hey, life's like that sometimes. I can but live in hope.

Cheers

DrG

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 05:07 AM

When I was at school, we used to say that twat meant pregnant goldfish. I doubt it was just our school?

When I let my dog out for his final run up the garden at night I invariably invite him to look for pussy cats and twat 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 05:30 AM

"This includes bullying. The examples of gang bullying among a certain group here are disgusting."

If I may make a point here, it seems to me that in any situation where somebody takes a stance which is unacceptable to the majority, there will be numerous posters decrying that stance.

To you those posters are a gang engaged in bullying the poor fellow whose opinions are responsible for the reaction.

Perhaps you wouldn't mind explaining how twenty or so people could disagree with (for example) a bigot, without setting off your "Bully" alarm?

I might not like Musket's method of posting, but if I happen to agree with the point he is making, I may post saying so. This IMHO doesn't make me a part of a bullying gang.

Your mileage may differ.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 05:35 AM

"I agree with Joe, for example, about ake. I think he is as wrong as he can be with his views on homosexuality, but he tries to express them based on his belief system."

With respect Mick, you could say the same about Pol Pot's opinions of intellectuals (which he defined as "anyone who carried a pen"), and look what followed from that.

Subject: RE: BS: Black Belt Obstreperous Prick Club
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Apr 14 - 05:42 AM

One of the problems with this thread is that some of those (I infer) being assessed by the membership committee are so very often right. Steve Shaw, Greg F, to take two examples. Even Mither when he forgets to be a bourgeois capitalist twat and member of the oppressor class.

Those who ought to be so assessed are apparently not being assessed. The proponents of irrationality and bigotry. Maybe they should have to have an invasive test for an unpleasant condition before being admitted. Examples would be Fugitive From Sanity, pete, Akenhateon, Keith the Weekend Warrior, and most of the time Jerk the Sailor.

It is far more important to censure (not censor, censure) unpleasant beliefs than unpleasant language.