|
12 Apr 01 - 09:52 AM (#438955) Subject: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST I read with some interset Clinton Hammond's thread. I'll never post another etc. etc. I was relating it to my own life. I look after a Uni. students residence. Funny thing happened as I was thinking about this thread. A number of the Uni. students that I once thought a 'PAIN IN THE ARSE' were the ones that became interesting, creative, mature, responsive to change, and lots more besides. Long may P.I.T.A.'s live. Forgive me if I'm wrong Clinton, but it's good to hear someone seem to say, "Feck the mould." As for me. I'm fecked if I know if you're right or wrong, but shit, it's great to hear your opinion. That's just my personal opinion. BS |
|
12 Apr 01 - 10:02 AM (#438960) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CamiSu I've found that most worthwhile things, people, situaions, etc are often difficult. Gotta work at it to get the prize...? CamiSu |
|
12 Apr 01 - 10:24 AM (#438973) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,Mr Red " Library Sorry to disagree, there are PITA's that have few redeeming features. self-centred, sly, underhand, tactical, arrogant, non-team players are of benefit only to themselves. YOU BET I have someone in mind right now. As I always say "Nice Guys Get Shit On" |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:04 PM (#439253) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond Interesting, creative, responsive to change?? Sure... but mature??? Me?????? Not on your life!! LOL!!! "self-centred, sly, underhand, tactical, arrogant, non-team players are of benefit only to themselves." you say self-centered, sly, tatical and non-team as if they are bad things.... If I don't look out for #1, sure as hell, nobody else is gonna!! And well, how often is arrogence just self confidence?? And underhand? Well.. it's an underhand world... step up and play the game or take yer ball and go home... "As I always say "Nice Guys Get Shit On" " Naaah... weak willed, wet-girls blouse, nancying, coiwards get shit on... oh, and Guest... while I do appreciate that there are people who are on my side as it were, I don't need any encouragement to be an asshole (a yodie-o, a yodie-o, a yodie-o)... I'm doin' just fine on my own! ;-) |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:14 PM (#439257) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: MMario Clinton - while you and I disagree on quite a few things - I gotta respect you!
|
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:23 PM (#439266) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond it's be a pretty damn boring world if we all agreed on everything eh MM... Some of the best discussions I've EVER been in have been with people with whom I strongly disagreed with... And ya.. another point about me I guess I'd like to make clear... 9 times out of 10 I'm not ARGUING... I'm discussing... Subtle but important difference eh... |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:28 PM (#439268) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,Matt_R Hey Clinton! Get yerself a bran muffin! |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:33 PM (#439272) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond and that from THE weak willed, wet-girls blouse, nancying, coward... yer pretty funny kid... |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:34 PM (#439273) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Bert Naaah... weak willed, wet-girls blouse, nancying, coiwards get shit on... So, who were you shitting on here |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:34 PM (#439274) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,davetnova you could say thats drink for you. It certainly is for me. |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:39 PM (#439277) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed Jeez Clint, I didn't realize you were an asshole until another 'Catter pointed it out in response to some discussion about gays. Until then, I was under the impression that you were simply one who (1) thinks and (2) is able to make their point in a logical fashion. I'm gonna work as hard as I can to be as big as asshole as Clint! (Gotta help me, brother) |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:43 PM (#439278) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Rick Fielding Look, I've got a busy day here. Buncha students, Heather's just discovered that the SECOND FLOOR OUTDOOR WINDOWS NEED WASHIN'(!!!) My damn banjo's due for a string change.... ..SO WHERE CAN I FIND SOME OF THOSE GIRLS IN WET BLOUSES? The ones in wet t-shirts are tooooo agressive! Rick |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:43 PM (#439279) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,Matt_R Pretty nasty statement for someone you don't even know, Clinton. |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:49 PM (#439287) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond Ya... well.. I'm a pretty nasty guy... What's this about wet t-shirts rick?? Where? |
|
12 Apr 01 - 04:53 PM (#439288) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed Blouse! Frilly little damp soaking blouse! |
|
12 Apr 01 - 05:44 PM (#439323) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Mr Red ClintonHammond Looks like I hit the boost button here. I stand by it, nice guys know they are gonna get shit on, but the thanks they get from genuinely grateful parties is reward in itself. nice guys don't have to be nice to people who have proved their lowly worth to society. 'sides all that niceness has to be balanced somewhere and they get quite a kick out of it, they just don't play the same game - it hits harder from the wrong direction! now who wants to play I FEEL IN A NOT NICE MOOD TODAY. |
|
12 Apr 01 - 05:47 PM (#439325) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond Mr Red... I'd be more than happy to stay here and BE NOT NICE back and forth with ya... but I gotta get my rear in gear for a gig in a coupl'a hours... So another time eh! ;-) |
|
12 Apr 01 - 06:09 PM (#439341) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Lonesome EJ Yeah, Clinton, I know I said you were an outspoken character who occasionally enjoys the Asshole Role, but I don't think what Matt said to you warranted the mean-spirited response you gave him, so maybe I was wrong. Maybe you really ARE an asshole. I'm not trying to start a flame war here. I just can't stand the bully stuff. |
|
12 Apr 01 - 06:47 PM (#439361) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Amos Tell ya what Clint -- since you basically enjoy the wonders of cyberspace and using technology and all -- whyn'cha learn to manage a simple little issue like tags, and stop being a jerk? I don't like stopping for traffic lights much, myself, but I guess I can cope and subscribe to the arrangement, for the sake of the overall net benefits. Hope you treated your friends in meatspace a little more kindly at your gig. I think first rate Asshole talent like yours ought to be reserved for appropriate targets and real situations. Otherwise it slips over the faint, thin line into Stupid. A |
|
13 Apr 01 - 10:51 AM (#439737) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond yer welcome to your opinion Amos... just like I am... Especially if we both realise that our opinions don't matter a tinkers cuss to either of us... Or to anyone else for that matter... |
|
13 Apr 01 - 08:26 PM (#440128) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: McGrath of Harlow "I gotta get my rear in gear" -
That sounds as if CH is indicating he is in agreement with the definition inmplied in the thread title...
Personally I think it'd be a real pain not to have an arsehole. Being a tube (like a worm) may be a drag at times, but being a bag (like a sea-anemone) would be a whole lot worse. |
|
13 Apr 01 - 08:32 PM (#440133) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R Don't forget planarians, McGrath. They exude flatworm-excrement through flamecells in the pores of their "skin". |
|
14 Apr 01 - 01:41 AM (#440289) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg UB Dan: Why work at being an an asshole? I should think it would be effortless...
|
|
14 Apr 01 - 03:04 AM (#440303) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC One of the things I like about this site is that just about all a person has to do in order to "not fit into the mold", is to take a little initiative, create something different, and contribute it to the shared effort.
Pretty cool, don't you think? Carol |
|
14 Apr 01 - 03:23 AM (#440305) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: katlaughing Well said, LeeJ and Amos. Pathetic that he always has to use derogatory rhetoric about homosexuals when putting someone down. Kinda makes ya wonder how comfy he is with his own sexuality, ya know? Getting his "rear in gear" could take on a whole new meaning then. kat |
|
14 Apr 01 - 04:10 AM (#440310) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: RichM Cut the bullshit, CH. This is not a discussion from you, , it's a mean, putdown using derogatory terms referring to homosexual behavior. It ain't funny, and it ain't called for. Take that bran muffin.
|
|
14 Apr 01 - 04:29 AM (#440312) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Roughyed What I don't understand is that if Clint is going to be a mean, self centred, underhand individual why don't he just go away and do it? Why waste our time telling us about it? Does he want our approval or something? Clint, some advice I don't think you are going to take is that you are heading towards loneliness and failure. You are confusing acquiring the means to buy pleasure with happiness. The only point to life is to help each other. I really do hope you wake up before it's too late. |
|
14 Apr 01 - 05:28 AM (#440320) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Banjer I think we need to step back and consider MattR's statement here. 'Hey Clinton! Get yerself a bran muffin!' What did Matt really mean here? Was he suggesting that Clinton eat a bran muffin, thereby showing a regard for Clinton's overall well being? (Roughage, when properly eaten, is GOOD for the body)...OR, was he suggesting another means of introducing the muffin into the body, one which would ultimately cause stoppage and make Clinton more full of shit than he already is? I would think that Matt probably was concerned for the health and wellbeing of a fellow Mudcatter and therefore should be applauded for his humanitarian effort! |
|
14 Apr 01 - 07:22 AM (#440334) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: McGrath of Harlow Happy Easter everyone, and please lighten up.
Maybe this should be called the Mudspat Cafe - we do seem to have a knack for getting roiled up about anything and everything. (Fortunately it normally dies down quickly too, but visitors might get an impression of a place much less friendly than it actually is..) |
|
14 Apr 01 - 09:57 AM (#440379) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond No... what matt was doing was trying to hoist me on my own petard... I use the phrase "try a bran muffin" on people who tend to be uptight and anal... Matt and I make no secret that we do NOT like each other... and had until this kept away from each other's posts... Not to sound childish with a "he started it", but he did step up to the whoop-ass plate... Who am I to not pitch to him? Swan... "The only point to life is to help each other"? Oh ya... tell that to the number of homeless people who die of hunger and exposure every fecking day! Or the number of children who don't get enough to eat in the morning before school and are more familiar with the buckle of the belt than a kiss goodnight! Ball! Help each other... Idealistic... and that's not bad... but niave... believe what you want... I disagree... Same like you disagree with me... RichM... "it's a mean, putdown using derogatory terms referring to homosexual behavior"??? a) Don't try to tell me what words I can and cannot use... b)No where do I even mention homosexuals... You've never met a mincing striaght guy before?? I know I have... It's like drawing the distinction between a homosexal, and a flaming fag... you can be straight and still be a flamer... The gays have NOT cornerd the market on that kind of behaviour... |
|
14 Apr 01 - 12:21 PM (#440459) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Good gods-a-mighty, he just doesn't get it does he????? So homeless people and starving babies are good little humans, but a young man murdered for being gay is a bad one? Gee, what compassion. It is bigots like yourself who contribute to the prejudice that caused a few "good ole boys" (probably latent homosexuals like yourself, Clinton) to torture Matthew Shepard and leave him for dead...and he died. I especially love your informed discusison of the difference beteen a "homosexual" and a "flaming fag." Remind me again how many gay "friends" you have? Bran muffins are not going to be enough...I would however recommend a dictionary (or at least spell-check). Yes that is petty, to point to someone's typos and grammar; but saves me the energy of saying what I REALLY think of this asshole. Oops, I did it anyway. Happy Easter! |
|
14 Apr 01 - 12:25 PM (#440462) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg BTW, I typed in EB Dan in an earlier thread, when I meant UB ED... so sorry. Maybe I should have just typed in "GUEST." ??? |
|
14 Apr 01 - 12:49 PM (#440487) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief it's a mean, putdown using derogatory terms referring to homosexual behavior Don't try to tell me what words I can and cannot use.. I don't see anything in the imperative in the line quoted above in boldface type. Saying "this is a nasty piece of English" is not telling you what to do. It is informing you of a fact which the informer obviously doesn't think you knew. Alex |
|
14 Apr 01 - 01:25 PM (#440516) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Nemesis It's probably haemmorroids (sic) |
|
14 Apr 01 - 01:29 PM (#440525) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R Yeah, Clinton Hammerrhoids. |
|
14 Apr 01 - 04:09 PM (#440613) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Irish sergeant Pleasant holiday to all. Neil |
|
14 Apr 01 - 04:21 PM (#440616) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Don Firth (Sigh. . . .) Don Firth |
|
14 Apr 01 - 04:33 PM (#440623) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Roughyed I really don't understand Clint's response to my statement that the only point to life is to help each other. I'm quite aware that there is incredible suffering in the world and so is Clint. The only adult response to that seems to me to be to firstly make a personal commitment that you will try not to add to it and then to do whatever is in your power to lessen that suffering. It doesn't mean that you are ever going to stop suffering - after all we're all going to die sooner rather than later whatever happens. But that doesn't absolve us of the responsibility to do what we can. |
|
15 Apr 01 - 12:27 PM (#441114) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond Peg... you're so myopic that after this, I'm not responding to any of your posts again... "homeless people and starving babies are good little humans, but a young man murdered for being gay is a bad one? " I NEVER said that or even inferred that! learn to read what IS in front of you... no what YOUR AGENDA makes you want to see... Believe what you want about my sexuality, but I am no more latently homosexual than any other male... I have more than a few gay friends (one cannot have been a dance and a theatre actor without meeting lots of them!) And I talk with them using the language I use everyday... fortunately they are not PC nazis... just gay... For that matter... no one in my life is very PC... and that's just the way I want it... I prefer to hang out with REAL people... "a dictionary (or at least spell-check)" Ohhh... I have bad typing and spelling... So fecking what?!?! Stick to the point if you're gonna discuss something with me... And believe me Peg... you're opinion of my asshole is worth about the same as my opinion of yours... Neither one of them is worth a tinkers cuss... |
|
15 Apr 01 - 07:45 PM (#441364) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Clinton--do you actually understand what is meant by latent homosexuality? I don't think you do. To say you are "no more latently homosexual than any other male" makes it pretty clear you have missed the point. I am a real person. I am not "politically correct." I simply hate bigots like you. Interesting that you use the term "PC Nazis"--very revealing indeed. And do feel free never to respond to me again; I couldn't care less. But past experience has shown you tend to refer again and again to this issue, and my words about it, and you in your typical oh-so-passive-aggressive manner, will no doubt continue to harp on it. Have fun. You have managed to alienate a lot of people here with your ignorant hate-mongering.
|
|
15 Apr 01 - 07:58 PM (#441373) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,The Seventeenth Karmapa Your karma's going south, my dear....you might want to cool the invective just a tad...Orgyeb |
|
15 Apr 01 - 08:21 PM (#441387) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: artbrooks Does anyone know if this guy is real, or is he an eight-year-old with the delusion that this kind of nonsense makes him sound like an adult? |
|
15 Apr 01 - 08:26 PM (#441394) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,Sappho To have beauty is to have only that But to have goodness is to be beautiful too. |
|
15 Apr 01 - 11:38 PM (#441481) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: katlaughing Good discussion and explanation of latent homosexuality HERE. Maybe it would help you figure out that hatefilled attitude you seem to exude, CH. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 12:27 AM (#441500) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Amos Kat: Y'know, I hate to disagree with anything you post, but that page doesn't explain anything. :>P A |
|
16 Apr 01 - 12:37 AM (#441504) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: katlaughing Amos, it does explain what is meant by the term "latent homosexuality." Perhaps you could find and post one that does explain more? |
|
16 Apr 01 - 12:53 AM (#441509) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC I don't really have any desire to be a part of the discussion about whether or not Clinton is a latent anything. My inclination is to believe what people tell me about themselves in that regard simply because it's probably not really any of my business. (Whether I think the person is an asshole or not.) Here's my question. Isn't it accepted wisdom that, with regard to homosexuality, the decision about when someone should come out to his or herself, or to the world at large, should be left up to that individual? Or am I remembering incorrectly? |
|
16 Apr 01 - 09:43 AM (#441600) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan UB Dan is a guest...UB Ed is a member...some people seem to have a hard time keeping them apart...I am not even sure who EB Dan is, but imagine my surprise at reading through and finding a post here calling me an asshole. Apparently, because Peg and I had a disagreement on the Kyoto treaty, I am an asshole too. The most interesting thing to me is that she continues to proclaim that she is the defender of gay people, yet she continues to use the word "gay" to try to insult Clinton as much as possible. Basically she continues to say Clinton is homophobic and an asshole and must therefore be gay. Nice going Peg...way to stereotype...but I guess its okay for you because you are morally superior. Chances are pretty good that we won't be able to continue this discussion because the thread might become too long for you to ever post to it again. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 10:23 AM (#441611) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: katlaughing That's a pretty twisted bit, there, UB Dan. You and Carol just displayed textbook examples of turning the defender into the perpetrator, i.e. gays and Peg. No one is asking him to come out, Carol. We are speaking out against his constant hatefilled messages belittling gays in general. I can't speak for Peg, but as a bisexual and a sister of a gay man, it behooves me to speak out against the homophobic rhetoric if the Clinton Hammonds of the world. If that means bringing into question his own sexuality, then so be it. He hasn't shown any frailty in dealing with such questioning. kat |
|
16 Apr 01 - 10:36 AM (#441615) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg thank you, Kat. Well put. I don't accuse CH of being gay and therefore an asshole. I speculate he is a latent homosexual because latent homosexuality in some "straight" men, including sexual feelings towards men that they find frightening or repugnant (usually because they have been raised to think gays or "evil" or "unnatural"), causes them to display homophobic behavior, and Clinton seems very much a textbook case. I think he should read up on it; might help him understand himself better. UB Dan, I am sorry if I confused your name with UB Ed. My mistake. I don't think anyone is an asshole because they *disagree* with me. I am a lot more discerning than that. Do show me where I called you an asshole because of your disagreement with me about the Kyoto accord. I would love to see that. GUEST: as for my karma going south; perhaps yours would be upped a notch if you had the balls to sign your name?
|
|
16 Apr 01 - 10:42 AM (#441620) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan But don't you see a sort of irony in fighting homophobia by saying anyone full of hate must be gay? What's your thinking? Or are you just assuming that calling someone gay would be a pithy insult. Either way don't you think you are belittling the very group you claim to defend. In essence you have become what you are attacking. You claim Clinton's mentioning of someone being effeminate or weak is an attack on gays and respond by saying he is a jerk and must be gay. Your generalization is neither more fair nor less offensive just be cause you are gay...maybe some of Clinton's best friends are gay, then his comment is no longer offensive....see what I'm saying. Kat, my stronger objection is to Peg's response that says since Clinton called somebody a sissy he is condoning the brutal slaughter of a human and in addition UB Dan is an asshole (?) |
|
16 Apr 01 - 10:49 AM (#441627) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed Wait a minute here. So, I'm the asshole and not Dan? |
|
16 Apr 01 - 10:59 AM (#441636) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu From above, a phrase, taken out of context, reads....is homophobic and an asshole.... Some assholes are homophobic. Sorry - I just couldn't resist. (ROTFL) |
|
16 Apr 01 - 11:00 AM (#441637) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg UB Dan wrote:
But don't you see a sort of irony in fighting homophobia by saying anyone full of hate must be gay? --where did I ever say anyone full of hate must be gay? I am speculating that Clinton Hammond is full of hatred towards gays ("faggots" to use his favorite term) because he himself may harbor feelinsg of latent homosexuality that frighten or repulse him. That is all. What's your thinking? --see above. Or are you just assuming that calling someone gay would be a pithy insult. --I have no problem with the word "gay" which is, I feel, usually a positive term. Referring to someone in a vindictive way as a "faggot" as Clinton has done in this forum on many occasions is NOT positive; but of course he tries to say, hey, it's okay, that's THEIR word that THEY use with EACH OTHER. That's like saying it is okay for a whitey like Clinton to use the "N" word when referring to a black person because some blacks use that word in their community...this is really arrogant (and ignorant at the same time). Either way don't you think you are belittling the very group you claim to defend. --no, I don't. In essence you have become what you are attacking. --a homophobe? Not me. You claim Clinton's mentioning of someone being effeminate or weak is an attack on gays and respond by saying he is a jerk and must be gay. --not at all what I said, and you really must choose your words more carefully. I take offense at his pejorative and derogatory terminology (which I notice you conveniently fail to address here; why is that?)
Your generalization is neither more fair nor less offensive just be cause you are gay... --I'm not gay; I am just not a bigot. maybe some of Clinton's best friends are gay, then his comment is no longer offensive.... --but people whose "best friends are gay" don't refer to people like Ashley MacIsaac as "faggot" and "pedophile" and say "he pees on little boys" etc.--my best friends ARE gay so allow me to know what I'm talking about. see what I'm saying. --not really. Kat, my stronger objection is to Peg's response that says since Clinton called somebody a sissy he is condoning the brutal slaughter of a human and in addition UB Dan is an asshole (?) --gee, now you're really making sense... My reference to Matthew Shepard was pretty clear; it is homophobia and hatred towards gays that allows such behavior (gay bashing which tunrs into vioent attack and in this case, murder) to be sanctioned and glorified. I try to be careful in the way I use language. I realize I can't expect that from everyone. But is it too much to ask that you at least read more carefully? BTW, still waiting for that quotation wherein I called you an asshole for disagreeing with you about Kyoto...
|
|
16 Apr 01 - 11:01 AM (#441640) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu I apologize if my last comment was off the subject. I'm going to faint..... |
|
16 Apr 01 - 11:37 AM (#441666) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan UB Dan wrote:
"--where did I ever say anyone full of hate must be gay? I am speculating that Clinton Hammond is full of hatred towards gays ("faggots" to use his favorite term) because he himself may harbor feelinsg of latent homosexuality that frighten or repulse him. That is all. "
(UB Dan):What I'm saying is if you perceive someone to be a jerk...maybe its just because they are a jerk and has nothing to do with sexuality. Judging someones sexuality based on non-sexual actions is the same as pre-judging how sopmeone will act based on knowing their sexuality. This is the definition of prejudice.
"--I have no problem with the word "gay" which is, I feel, usually a positive term. Referring to someone in a vindictive way as a "faggot" as Clinton has done in this forum on many occasions is NOT positive; but of course he tries to say, hey, it's okay, that's THEIR word that THEY use with EACH OTHER. That's like saying it is okay for a whitey like Clinton to use the "N" word when referring to a black person because some blacks use that word in their community...this is really arrogant (and ignorant at the same time)."
"In essence you have become what you are attacking.
--a homophobe? Not me.
"Your generalization is neither more fair nor less offensive just be cause you are gay... "
"maybe some of Clinton's best friends are gay, then his comment is no longer offensive...."
"--but people whose "best friends are gay" don't refer to people like Ashley MacIsaac as "faggot" and "pedophile" and say "he pees on little boys" etc.--my best friends ARE gay so allow me to know what I'm talking about."
"Kat, my stronger objection is to Peg's response that says since Clinton called somebody a sissy he is condoning the brutal slaughter of a human and in addition UB Dan is an asshole (?)"
"My reference to Matthew Shepard was pretty clear; it is homophobia and hatred towards gays that allows such behavior (gay bashing which tunrs into vioent attack and in this case, murder) to be sanctioned and glorified.
I try to be careful in the way I use language. I realize I can't expect that from everyone. But is it too much to ask that you at least read more carefully?"
"BTW, still waiting for that quotation wherein I called you an asshole for disagreeing with you about Kyoto..." (UB Dan):I had assumed that you would have some reason for calling me an asshole...that is the only topic in which you and I have ever met (as far as I know). I didn't realize that it was just a random insult at a random person...you're right...the randomness of it does make it morally superior to an attack on a specific person for a specific action (i.e. Clinton insulting Ashley). Although, I guess it was a typo and it was actually Ed that you intended to call an asshole...because....well, I guess it is still pretty random... |
|
16 Apr 01 - 11:45 AM (#441677) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Random linguistic violence. Is this the best Mudcat has to offer? Alex |
|
16 Apr 01 - 11:48 AM (#441678) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed Hold on a second! Now I'm a random asshole? I'm with Gnu! |
|
16 Apr 01 - 12:53 PM (#441740) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: katlaughing UB Dan: perhaps you have not been here long enough to know the many, many times, Clinton has used this kind of hatefilled language. That, basically, is what Peg and I are speaking up about. Obviously he considers it a put down to allude that someone may be gay, otherwise he wouldn't use the language he does. Also, sticking point with me, if you refer to my sexuality, I prefer bisexual. You could even say "bisexual with a male SO." Neither Peg, not I have become the bigot we accuse Clinton of being. If you read through any of our posts, you will find that we are both very caring and open people. Neither one of us is content to stand by when someone denigrates a class of people as a matter of course. I think I understand what you are getting at: that by calling Clinton an asshole or whatever, we are no better than him with his name-calling, i.e. we've sunk to his level. I disagree. When I spout off it is usually for a very good reason and not my usual way of language. I am sure Peg would say the same. Clinton does it all of the time and seems pretty darn proud about it, too. So, bottom line, I won't stay silent when I see such rhetoric. It would be the same as if I stayed silent when someone called my grandsons "picaninnes" or "nigger" because their dad is mahagony and their mom kind of pinkish. If I cannot speak up against bigotry then I have no reason, nor right, to exist. kat |
|
16 Apr 01 - 01:41 PM (#441782) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan Kat, I didn't realize you have a past unresolved conflict with Clinton. What I was suprised at was that, in the context of this thread, Peg was accusing Clinton of condoning or encouraging the brutal murder of anyone. Sorry about the incorrect identification of your sexuality, but I don't think that changes the message I was trying to convey. My surprise wasn't that you thought Clinton might be offended if he were called gay, but rather that you thought a good offensive remark was to call Clinton gay...subtle difference (like imply and infer it only matters which side of the fence you are on). I can understand your dislike of a word...but from what I gather from this thread and going back to the Ashley thread (I read it to gain perspective). You dislike Clinton for using an offensive term and Clinton dislikes Ashley for either engaging or claiming to engage in an offensive act (pedophilia). I'm not saying you are as bad as Clinton, I'm saying Clinton is no worse than you...I may need to read more older threads, but I don't see any explicit attack on all gay people...only one implied from his use of a term which you object too (which, as I said, I understand). Perhaps he would be more receptive to a suggestion that was not given in such a acidic manner. No one likes it when confronted with amoral superior attitude... Perhaps I just need to know more of the history between you all though. Peg's attack on Clinton came at about the same time she was calling me an asshole...I thought that if they were both based on the same thought and logic she gave to attacking me, I could only assume that Clinton, himself was responsible for single handedly saving the life of every single gay person on both sides of the equator. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 01:44 PM (#441787) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Calling pedophilia an "offensive act" is like calling rape-murder "objectionable." Alex |
|
16 Apr 01 - 02:04 PM (#441818) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan well, I'd object :) |
|
16 Apr 01 - 02:06 PM (#441823) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond No kiddin eh MT! |
|
16 Apr 01 - 02:34 PM (#441846) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Sourdough Whew! I couldn't read all the way through this thread. It isn't pleasant seeing normally thoughtful and positive people being driven into such anger by the prodding of someone who seems to enjoy lighting fuses more than he does exploring an issue but then, perhaps he is so sure that he is correct, he does not need further input that might modify or change his position. The worst part, though, is he manages to bring forward the less than best parts of others. This is not a valuable skill. The reason I opened this thread in the first place was curiousity about a thread name had attracted so many posts. The first post, anyway, made me smile. Again it was a GUEST who had discovered the value in Clinton Hammond's posts. So many GUESTS have a lot to contribute and many of them join Mudcat when they see what it has to offer. It seems tha there are a few who come to Mudcat, discover Clinton Hammond, write a message or two in his support and disappear. Sourdough |
|
16 Apr 01 - 03:04 PM (#441872) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: katlaughing That's some very weird logic that you are reading into things, UB Dan. I don't consider that Peg, nor I, either one, have "amoral superior attitudes." And your last inferrence about Clinton saving all the gays in the world is facetious at best, horribly blind at worst. I never said anything ahout unresolved issues with Clinton. I have no issues with him at all, except when he starts spouting off homophobic slurs, then I call it as I see it. I will not post to this thread, again, as it seems pointless to parse with someone who obviously reads into messages whatever they want. kat
|
|
16 Apr 01 - 03:18 PM (#441886) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan sorry...I meant "a morally superior attitude" not "amoral superior"...in this case a typo drastically changed the meaning and I am sorry if this offended you (I'd be suprised of course) My last inferrence about Clinton saving all the gays in the world is facetious at best, horribly blind at worst? Wow you mean I might have been being facetious...huh, I never would have wanted that...I do truly believe it is a fact, I don't know how anyone with the word "laughing" in her name could have thought I was joking. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 03:42 PM (#441906) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu Danny boy, the pipes are calling you home on this one. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 04:25 PM (#441942) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan Gnu, you may be right...my last post is a little ascerbic...Kat, "amoral" really was a typo of "a morally", I'm sorry if you thought it was meant otherwise. And in my last post I could have said what I meant without resorting to a personal attack. I just became frustrated when you said that I read whatever I wanted into people's remarks...but I understand how you could have been frustrated by my amoral vs a moral mistake. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 04:44 PM (#441956) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,Dragonball Z In life as with anything, there are winners and losers. Clinton has made it very clear which category he falls into. (Write him off and move on.) |
|
16 Apr 01 - 04:55 PM (#441964) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Kim C Clint's always been nice to me... |
|
16 Apr 01 - 05:53 PM (#441994) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC I said... "I don't really have any desire to be a part of the discussion about whether or not Clinton is a latent anything." And kat/katlaughing said... "You and Carol just displayed textbook examples of turning the defender into the perpetrator, i.e. gays and Peg."
Based on what I have said, and repeated in the first part of this post, I think I is fair for me to say that I have not done what I have been accused of by kat/katlaughing. I am not participating in the discussion about Clinton. I believe my question is a fair one, and applies to anyone who may be a latent homosexual but is not ready to come out about it yet. I'm beginning to become tired of being flamed by you kat/katlaughing. Your anger gets in the way of your highest and best expression of yourself. Carol |
|
16 Apr 01 - 06:38 PM (#442029) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC ...and I will state here, for the record, that I have a close family member who is gay. I have close family members who are black, and some who are part Vietnamese, some who are part Native American and Hispanic. I understand the hurt and damage that is caused by bigotry. But I don't see that backing people up into corners has accomplished, or is accomplishing anything for you except causing people to become even more intrenched in their existing thought processes. Carol |
|
16 Apr 01 - 06:39 PM (#442030) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Is there any way to define "latent homosexual" that isn't psychobabble bullsh*t? If someone likes women, dates women, f*cks women, loves women, maybe has married a woman or two, and yet doesn't do all these things with/to men, isn't calling him a "latent homosexual" because of things he says about gays a little -- um -- unverifiable? Alex |
|
16 Apr 01 - 07:08 PM (#442058) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: enkd Alex- I think that is the very appeal of the term... It is a way of questioning someone's sexuality for which there is no rebuttal. This also makes it come across as something of a cheap shot in a discussion such as this, IMHO... Ian |
|
16 Apr 01 - 07:10 PM (#442062) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Ian, that's kinda what I thunk. thanks. Alex |
|
16 Apr 01 - 07:12 PM (#442063) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief It works something like this: "You're secretly X, but you're in denial!" "I am not!" "See?!" If it can't be disproven, what does it really mean? Usually not a hill o' beans. |
|
16 Apr 01 - 08:17 PM (#442101) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Mousethief and enkd; the point, which I am sorry you have missed, is that Clinton uses hateful, homophobic language; THAT is why I think he may have some issues with his sexuality...I could honestly give a shit if he is gay, or bi-curious, or whatever. It is his repellent and consistent use of the word "faggot" which offends me, and like katlaughing, I will NOT sit back and ignore it when someone uses that word, or any other which is offered in the hateful way it is. Leaping lizards, does no one understand the English language anymore? |
|
16 Apr 01 - 08:33 PM (#442114) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu I do. If I see a particular kind of electrical distribution panel in a building I am inspecting, I notify my client that the breakers in this panel have the possibility of being a latent fire hazard by virtue of the fact that they may remain closed in overcurrent. Due to this malfunction, they do not perform the safety function intended. While they do not cause the fire, they continue to feed the fire and, thusly, are a latent fire hazard. As for the definition of latent homosexuality given in the article blue-clickied above, the defining sentence is not a sentence - at least not in the English language. I repeat it for your convenience : "Latent homosexuality can be defined as homosexual arousal which the individual is either unaware of or dent. " Now, I know what a latent fire hazard is, but I'll be d***ed if I know what a latent homosexual is.
|
|
17 Apr 01 - 01:45 PM (#442676) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond I use HATEFUL language sometimes (period, full stop!) because there are things that I hate... Like pedophiles, rapists, car-jackers, starvation, abouse, just to name a few... When I tralk about them, I use every hateful tool in the english language bag of tricks because I like too... I've even used the word "Mudcatter" as a slur! I'm also tickled pink (read into that what you will) that you people care enough about my willie and where I put it, to have this discussion... I feel all John Holmsian at having a 78+ post thread about my 'cack'! MT... Nice point... I'd never though of that before... I like the way you put it... It reminds me of the babble that some zelot X-tians have tried to use on me to 'convert' me... "there's only one god", they say... "how do you know" I ask... "the bible says so" is their response... Not worth a pile of dingo's kidneys, and argument like that... |
|
17 Apr 01 - 01:50 PM (#442682) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief With you all the way, Clinton. Circular arguments hold no water with somebody who doesn't already buy into at least one of the premises. Peg, I understand the English language well enough to know that if a claim can't be DISPROVED, then it's meaningless. There is nothing Clinton could do to prove he's not latently homosexual, since the very "definition" of that term indicates it's subconscious. If I hate blacks, am I latently African? If I hate Jews, am I latently Jewish? If I hate skateboarders, am I a latent thrasher? It's bullshit. It's a groundless venemous attack, or it's psychobabble. Either way, it has no place in a rational discussion. Mind you, I'm not saying I hate blacks, Jews, or thrashers. (Somebody will always bring this up -- some people apparently are immune to the concept of "example" -- if this doesn't apply to you, ignore this paragraph.) Neither am I saying that I condone the use of the word "faggot." I do not. I wish Clinton wouldn't use it. But I don't think that his use of it makes him a "latent homosexual." Perhaps a blatant homophobe. But not a latent anything. Alex |
|
17 Apr 01 - 03:32 PM (#442787) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Rick Fielding I HATE onions! Just seeing one in front of me can make me queasy enough to throw up! Yes, it comes from a bad experience I had when they tried to force me to eat a creamed onion (barf) at Private School when I was 13. (My parents thought I'd learn responsibility and discipline with a stint in Boarding School...Ha Ha!) Yeah, so it was only ONE onion, and now I take it out on ALL onions. I don't care. I don't want them in my house, and I only grudgingly accept them in restaurants. I'd send every one of 'em right back to the ground where they came from. Holy cow, I'm an Onionophobe! Oh no, I'm a latent Onion myself!! Sorry. Carry on Rick |
|
17 Apr 01 - 03:34 PM (#442789) Subject: Pain in the arse From: Clinton Hammond LOL!! Rick... yer a goof... Keep it up eh! ;-) |
|
17 Apr 01 - 04:36 PM (#442828) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief I love latent onions! In a cream sauce with shallots... Delicious! Alex |
|
17 Apr 01 - 05:10 PM (#442845) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu Clinton, if I am ever to take you seriously, which I am unsure of at present, given your misuse of Canajun, you must understand, it's "eh ?" or "eh !" or some combination thereof. Some respect for the Canadian language would be appreciated, eh ? BTW, lose the faggot stuff, eh ? It may stir up some shit and discussion is good, eh, but, really, when you piss off people like Kat and Peg, eh, you piss off a lot of the rest of us, eh... oops, didn't mean to speak for anyone but myself, eh... you piss me off when you do that, eh! I welcome the opportunity to banter with you and learn from you, but, hey, eh ?! |
|
17 Apr 01 - 05:51 PM (#442867) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R Do I have to spell it out? C-H-E-E-S-E--A-N-D--O-N-I-O-N-S oh no! |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:23 PM (#442875) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Man and machine Keep yourself clean Or be a has-been Like the dinosaur.... |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:31 PM (#442877) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R WOOOHAAA!! Alex knows what I'm talking about! YE-YES!!!! |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:36 PM (#442883) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: RichM Rick, ya don't know what you are missing! Onions, leeks, garlic, chives, shallots...a whole spectrum of good flavours that add to the total delicious-ity of food... My dad would agree with you tho...he was a strict meat and potatoes man, no spices, no condiments except salt pepper and ketchup.And none of this fresh vegetable crap either--canned peas yessir! My mom would occasionally try to sneak some onions/garlic etc into the roast beef, but Dad caught it every time... |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:37 PM (#442884) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Here we are once again, on another one-night stand We're only here for you out there, So give yourselves a great big hand Major Happy, Major Happy Major Happy's Up and Coming Once-Upon-A-Goodtime Band Neil Innes rocks. |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:43 PM (#442890) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R I was born in the country, beside a chicken shack... |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:45 PM (#442892) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief I know you know what you know But you should know by now that you're not me. |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:46 PM (#442895) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Can you tell me what you thinka bout this low-fat diet shampoo? Do you think it's crunchy, half-crunchy, or not crunchy at all? Put a tick in the appropriate box, there's nothing to it.
Yes, no, don't know, I don't care. |
|
17 Apr 01 - 06:48 PM (#442899) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R Hey Diddle diddle Cat and a fiddle Piggy in the middle Poo-ah-a-poo! |
|
17 Apr 01 - 08:07 PM (#442979) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Alex wrote: "Neither am I saying that I condone the use of the word "faggot." I do not. I wish Clinton wouldn't use it." That is my point entirely. Why you are all in a huff about whether his latent homosexuality can be proven or disproven, I have no idea. I accuse of him of such because a) I think it is true and realizing it might make him accept it and move on from his childish, hateful slurs, and b) usually doing so infuriates homophobic jackasses like himself... But I would also agree with your assessment of "blatant homophobe" in lieu of "latent homosexual." I personally do to think the latter term is a necessarily negative thing, unless it is repressed and festers into hatred and ignorant bigotry...as it has in the case of our ever-so-eloquent Canadian friend here...who is, indeed, a blatant homophobe.
|
|
17 Apr 01 - 11:38 PM (#443136) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Why you are all in a huff about whether his latent homosexuality can be proven or disproven, I have no idea. Well, I thought I had made it plain; I shall try to put it another way. Say that you really hated something, anything. Let's say -- um -- child molesters. Now let's say that I'm married to a child molester, or perhaps am a clinical psychologist that works with child molesters. And it really bugs me when people hate child molesters. So I say that you are a "latent child molester." You wouldn't really hate these people unless you have something inside of you that you are afraid of or not in touch with. Now there is no way you can disprove this, because it's a bunch of crap and not subject to verification or falsification. It's a low blow, a cheap shot, and a bunch of crap to boot. Going around calling people names is not a good thing. Thus my calling you a "latent child molester" is a nasty piece of work. These are the sorts of things I get in a huff about. So sue me. I hate bullshit, I hate low blows, I hate psychobabble. This is all 3 wrapped up into one. If you still don't get it, I'm afraid I can't help you. Maybe somebody else can explain it better. Alex |
|
17 Apr 01 - 11:51 PM (#443142) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Alex-- you still don't get it (and I don't really understand why you are getting all upset at ME unless it is something personal issue you have with me from past dealings on this board; hey, dude, whatever). You have completely missed my point, which is that I don't CARE if CH is a latent homosexual or not (did I not say this already at least once? Correct me if I am wrong). He is a bigot. He uses homophobic language and has done repeatedly on this board even though people have called him on it. For you to demonize me with this picayunish nonsense about what a "low blow" (Freudian slip?) it is to infer he is a latent homosexual because he is such a homphobe is to basically give tacit approval to Clinton's attitudes and language. If that is where you are coming from, well, say so. Latent homosexuality has a very specific meaning and context; your rather lame attemnpt to draw a parallel by using the word "latent" to apply to something it does not apply to, is, like I have said already a couple of times, missing the point. Feel free to address my original context. To treat this like a squabble about terminology strikes me as ridiculous. And for you to accuse me of "calling people names" is patently absurd, given the asshole (there's a name for ya) you seem to be defending here.
|
|
18 Apr 01 - 12:24 AM (#443168) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Just because somebody calls names doesn't mean nobody can call HIM names. Now THAT is absurd. He is a bigot. He uses homophobic language and has done repeatedly on this board even though people have called him on it I never contradicted any part of this description. For you to demonize me with this picayunish nonsense about what a "low blow" (Freudian slip?) it is to infer he is a latent homosexual because he is such a homphobe is to basically give tacit approval to Clinton's attitudes and language. Not in the least. To say that it's wrong to punch Harry is not to condone Harry's punching you. As I pointed out, I am also offended by Clinton's language. You somehow seem to think that if someone is offensive, "anything goes" in what you say to/about him in response. This is wrong. Two wrongs do NOT make a right. Latent homosexuality has a very specific meaning and context It's psychobabble bullshit and, as I said before, it has no place in discussion. your rather lame attempt to draw a parallel by using the word "latent" to apply to something it does not apply to, is, like I have said already a couple of times, missing the point. Ooooh, now we're getting NASTY. My analogy was "lame" was it? How good are you at analogies? How much training in rhetoric or logic do you have? As was pointed out above, "latent" doesn't apply to homosexuality any more than it applies to child molestation. Just because a bunch of psychobabblers have used it in psychobabble books doesn't mean it MEANS anything, or has any corresponding reality outside those books. I don't really care what YOUR issue is; if you use bullshit logic to defend it, then you're guilty of using bullshit logic. I was not acting as a defender of Clinton here. I think he was wrong and have said so. In my "attack" on the term "latent homosexuality" I am acting not as a defender of Clinton, but as a defender of rationality. I'm sorry you don't see the difference, as you have repeatedly admitted. Finally, I don't have anything against you (yet); I am just responding to what is being said. I don't care if it were said by Santa Claus or by the Masked Marvel; if it's bullshit, it's still bullshit. Alex |
|
18 Apr 01 - 12:29 AM (#443172) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Jon Freeman All this talk of faggots is making me hungry. Sorry they have onions Rick:
800 grams pigs liver Fry the liver. Slice the liver and fat back. Peel and slice the onions. Put the meat and onions in a saucepan with just enough water to cover them. Heat to boiling point, cover the pan, reduce the heat, and simmer for 30 minutes. Strain off the liquid and reserve for gravy. Mince the meat and onions finely. Add the herbs, salt, pepper and nutmeg. Beat the egg until it's liquid and stir in. Mix in enough breadcrumbs to make a mixture which can be moulded. Divide it into 8 equal portions and shape them into round balls. Cut caul fat, if used, large enough to encase the balls and wrap each ball in fat. Alternately, roll each ball in flour. Lay the faggots side by side in a greased baking tin. Cover the tin loosely with foil. Bake in a moderate oven at 180 centigrade for 25 minutes. Remove the foil and bake for 10 minutes to brown the tops of the faggots. Serve hot with a thickened gravy made from the cooking liquid or a tomatoe sauce.
|
|
18 Apr 01 - 12:32 AM (#443174) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Fine, Alex, if your defense of all this is that I'm irrational and talking bullshit and psychobabble and you insist on telling me what does or does not "have a place" in discussion, that's the way it is. Whatever. I don't call that debate, I call it tyranny. Try doing some research before you dismiss soemthing as "psychobabble." Looking at one website doesn't count. Training in rhetoric? Yes, in fact; I teach writing for a living. |
|
18 Apr 01 - 01:12 AM (#443193) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Matt_R Maybe it's like when little boys are mean and chase and bother little girls, and say they're icky and have cooties when they REALLY like them! |
|
18 Apr 01 - 06:17 AM (#443264) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: KingBrilliant Hmmmm. People are generally only a pain in the arse if you view them as such - and that's often not their intention (OK - sometimes it is, but not always). Sometimes when you take a violent dislike/objection to someone (or their stated opinions) it is actually more to do you with you than with them. Clinton - a few times I've read your posts and thought 'arsehole' - but not 'pain in the arse' - there's a subtle distinction. Anyway - I think the world needs abrasive arsehole types - they're alive and they're fun and they add a bit of texture to the world. I prefer people who are a bit or an arsehole rather than people who are 'up their own arses' - and I must say that some of the responses here have tended toward the latter.... I'm not in favour of toning down the Clinton - to thine own self be true, mate. Kris (who likes to think she can be a bit of an arsehole too, on occasion). |
|
18 Apr 01 - 09:41 AM (#443367) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg I can certainly be an asshole on occasion, but I am happy to say I am not a homophobic asshole.
|
|
18 Apr 01 - 09:49 AM (#443371) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,kat@her sister's Me, too, Peg. |
|
18 Apr 01 - 10:14 AM (#443376) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu Now, where have I heard that before ? |
|
18 Apr 01 - 10:21 AM (#443383) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Jon Freeman Just take a step back: The term Homophobia was defined as "the "dread" of being in close quarters with homosexuals",(Weinberg, 1972). Pharr (1988) defines homophobia as the irrational fear, hatred and intolerance of people who are gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Even the term has its roots in and is psychobabble and further appears to have been extended to include other groups. My concern in this thread is not whether Clinton fits that label or about his sexual tendencies (latent or otherwise) but the willingness of people, particularly those who have voiced opionions supporting the rights of others to attach such labels. Jon |
|
18 Apr 01 - 11:53 AM (#443449) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed Jon, I'm not following your point regarding your concern...Would you elaborate, please? Ed |
|
18 Apr 01 - 12:18 PM (#443486) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief I don't call that debate, I call it tyranny. Expressing my opinion is tyranny, eh? You must warn us if you are going to use words in a way completely contrary to their dictionary definition. We get confused easily. Try doing some research before you dismiss soemthing as "psychobabble." Looking at one website doesn't count. Now you know exactly how much research I've done? You must have a really good mindreading device. Is it for sale? I see you have failed to comment upon my accurate observation that you are unable to distinguish between defending a person, and critiquing the means used to attack him. Your English classes must be a riot. Alex |
|
18 Apr 01 - 01:16 PM (#443543) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond I very well may be an asshole, but I certainly am not a homophobe... Yer just ticked off casue I use words you don't like... Tough "Life sucks, get a fucking helmet", to quote Doctor Dennis Leary... |
|
18 Apr 01 - 08:02 PM (#443905) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: McGrath of Harlow I know it's probably pedantic, but I get irritated by the use of the word "homophobic" to mean being prejudiced against gay people.
What the word ought to mean, given its etymology, is being prejudiced against people who are like yourself -for example people of the same sex, or race, or sexual inclination, whatever. Which is quite a useful concept to have a word for. As for people who are bigotted against gay people - I'd just call them people who are bigotted against gay people.
Do gay people ever get accused of being latent heterosexuals? |
|
18 Apr 01 - 09:02 PM (#443941) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC Here's an amusing thought. At least I find it amusing. If a person who displays hatred of homosexuals is homophobic and a latent homosexual, is it possible that a person who displays hatred of homophobes is a latent homophobe? Would such a person be a "homophobophobic"? (if anyone flames me for this bit of humor, I shall have him/her for lunch... ) |
|
18 Apr 01 - 09:08 PM (#443950) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC ...and I don't mean that in a sexual way, nor do I mean that I shall have him/her over for lunch. |
|
18 Apr 01 - 10:28 PM (#444018) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Lonesome EJ I don't know Carol. You might be a latent Mudcatter Masticator. And what's this about "get a fucking helmet" Clinton? Either you've got a really low ceiling or you need to get one of those padded headboards. |
|
19 Apr 01 - 12:37 AM (#444093) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Carol, thank you for the belly laugh! I'm sure I shall sleep better tonight and I have you to thank. Alex |
|
19 Apr 01 - 02:20 AM (#444129) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Alex; gee, your last response to me was not QUITE condescending enough; care to try again? You and your "accurate observations" make me laugh actually. I mean, if you're just going to argue both sides (and pat yourself on the back after doing so) why address anyone else in the first place? And I do call that tyranny...and yeah, I know what the word means.
|
|
19 Apr 01 - 03:04 AM (#444143) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Clinton Hammond Lonesome... it's a quote... it's not a helmet for fucking... *sigh*... watch Dennis Learys "No Cure for Cancer"... CarolC... "homophobophobic"? Damn good word! Try singing it! ;-) |
|
19 Apr 01 - 04:37 AM (#444165) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: KingBrilliant Wouldn't it be aweful to be phobophobic. Then you'd be scared of being scared - which means that you'd be scared - so you'd be scared of that - which would be really scarey. I've frightened myself now Kris |
|
19 Apr 01 - 04:42 AM (#444167) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Jon Freeman Sums it up nicely Kris Jon (who wishes he had coined that term - copyright it Kris) |
|
19 Apr 01 - 05:44 AM (#444188) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu CarolC said... if anyone flames me for this bit of humor, I shall have him/her for lunch... I thought you were carniphobic, no ? |
|
19 Apr 01 - 06:08 AM (#444194) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC (Oops! Caught in the act of flagrant hyperbole. I guess I'd better get one of those helmets, too... ) |
|
19 Apr 01 - 10:53 AM (#444374) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg why would someone "flame" you for trying to be humorous? Hmm, sounds like latent vindictiveness there... (just kidding) |
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:08 AM (#444388) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan Actually, that would be outright vindictiveness UB Dan...the latent nice guy |
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:21 AM (#444399) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg UB Dan; I do not understand your comment. My thought (naturally intended to inject humor) was that CarolC, worried about being flamed for her "humorous" comment, perhaps had intentions not wholly humorous...than again, I did not think she was being flamed by kat when she accused her of it, so I guess one's definition of flaming is relative depending who is on the receiving end, eh? |
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:29 AM (#444414) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan Peg...it's not only important to be able to say something in good humour...it is also important to recognize it in others... |
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:38 AM (#444422) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Peg Dan; I have a very evolved sense of humor actually...and am very tolerant and open-minded. Believe it or not. I think it is all too easy for someone to say whatever the hell they want in cyberspace (in a forum like this for example) and when someone takes offense to it, say, "But I was only kidding! You have no sense of humor! Lighten up!" As if the offender is always and by default the king/queen of subtlety and innuendo and wit, and the offendee is always an unsophisticated and uptight pollyanna. I understand humor fine; it's bigotry that baffles and angers me.
|
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:44 AM (#444425) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Metchosin and since there is nothing to fear but fear itself regarding really lame comments, I guess if you were afraid of frightened wolves you would be suffering from phobolobophobia. |
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:45 AM (#444429) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: Metchosin and fear of resonator guitars would be dobrophobia |
|
19 Apr 01 - 11:57 AM (#444441) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: GUEST,UB Dan "Actually, that would be outright vindictiveness UB Dan...the latent nice guy"
Where is the bigotry? Where is the serious comment that I then turned around claiming to be a joke. It is a play on the outright vs. latent discussion that was being carried out and which you joined into (i.e. "why would someone "flame" you for trying to be humorous? Hmm, sounds like latent vindictiveness there... ") No offense was meant...it was just subtlety and wit(no innuendo).
"I understand humor fine" -I'm not sure you do
|
|
19 Apr 01 - 12:11 PM (#444447) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu Peg... slow deep breaths. Life is but a joke, and we are all comics. I try to laugh first and then ask questions. |
|
19 Apr 01 - 12:47 PM (#444473) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: wysiwyg Oh, so THIS is where you've all been hanging out! ~S~ |
|
19 Apr 01 - 12:58 PM (#444482) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed Welcome Susan! Wondered where YOU were. This is a great thread! Hang around long enough and someone may even call you a random asshole! LOLLOLLOL |
|
19 Apr 01 - 01:23 PM (#444516) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu Kinda like a drive by flaming ? Someone going to do a 2 ? My modem is groaning and my skills are lacking. |
|
19 Apr 01 - 02:10 PM (#444553) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC *BLUSH* Are you guys fighting over me now? (gorsh... I feel so loved) |
|
19 Apr 01 - 02:24 PM (#444568) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: mousethief Peg, I mean, if you're just going to argue both sides (and pat yourself on the back after doing so) why address anyone else in the first place? You still don't get it. I'm not arguing both sides, because I'm not arguing FOR Clinton's behavior at all. Sigh. Alex |
|
19 Apr 01 - 03:27 PM (#444638) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: CarolC And let us not forget that gentle but penetrating humor, carefully placed, can accomplish much that bluster cannot. Remember Samuel Clemens and Will Rogers. |
|
19 Apr 01 - 03:35 PM (#444655) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: wysiwyg Clemens and Rogers, that outstanding tango team of years gone by. UB Ed, you have got to stop expecting US to be Ed-- YOU be Ed, dagnabbit! *G* I'll see if I can come up with a song for this thread. It's my new commitment-- to enter into [whatever we can all agree to call a thread like this] in song, not in rhetoric. All I can hear today is Emmylou Harris and Ricky Skaggs, both so young, so long ago, singing Green Pastures. ~S~
|
|
19 Apr 01 - 03:45 PM (#444670) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: gnu 135 posts... that's what a pain in the arse is. C'mon... someone blueie this to a 2. |
|
19 Apr 01 - 04:18 PM (#444696) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: wysiwyg Here is one approach. ~S~ |
|
19 Apr 01 - 04:19 PM (#444699) Subject: RE: Pain in tha arse From: UB Ed This may not be a good idea...
|