donald trump (general usa sucks thread)

LT42

This is the part where I say no I didn’t say that, you said it. And then you come back with, no I didn’t say that, you said it. Is it?

hugopal

LT42 Is it?

…

LT42 I don’t need your help, Hugo

Do your own work.

hugopal

303abuser we pointed them out as they happened

You threw accusations, but nothing I said has justified them.

303abuser we all know what you’re implying

What’s that then? And perhaps ask yourself why it is you’re imagining and projecting so much of whatever it is.

303abuser

hugopal the amount of practice it must take to be that obtuse is impressive. if only you were half as smart as you think you are. your logic is basically that you’re points are valid, not at all ignorant, and that every single other person here is projecting something onto you. if that’s not mental gymnastics to avoid a re-assessment of your own viewpoint, i don’t know what is.

Along_the_Wire

Please stop being a cunt

LT42

hugopal Post the stats for offended versus not offended with the word. Therefore proving whatever point it is you’re trying to make. You tried it with police brutality and it didn’t work, maybe you can salvage your rep with a win this time.

LT42

Hugo, I have a cousin who’s gay and married and isn’t offended by the word “homo”, as like most words, context is important but most importantly he’s not a moaning git who gets offended by what people say all the time.

What do you think? Will I send on the dictionary link you posted and see if he gets offended? Let me know.

hugopal

LT42 he’s not a moaning git who gets offended by what people say all the time

That would be @Along_the_Wire .

In the context of the general discussion I think asking you why you chose that particular term is reasonable.

LT42 Hugo, I have a cousin who’s gay and married and isn’t offended by the word “homo”

Ah the good old one of my best friends/close relatives defence. Classic.

Smallman1

Hugo - Up yo bants brother!

hugopal

LT42 Post the stats for offended versus not offended with the word. Therefore proving whatever point it is you’re trying to make. You tried it with police brutality and it didn’t work

False equivalence.

Also, the amount of people who are offended or not is only one part of what would need to be considered and wouldn’t necessarily be proof of anything on its own; one would also need to consider the extent to which it is used as derogatory in the first place (it’s true that people can get offended by things which weren’t intended to offend, and also vice-versa).

Such data doesn’t seem to exist though anyway, even if it could be reliably collected and assessed.

For what it’s worth, as well as the standard dictionary definition, the most upvoted definition for “homo” on urban dictionary also says “derogatory term for a gay man”.

LT42It’s not me who’s claiming all those who are gay are offended by it. That’s on you

Lol, where did I say “all those who are gay are offended by it”? I was pointing out that the term is generally considered to be negative and so wondered by extension why it was that you chose to use it as opposed to a word without such connotations.

Dubman

Could this Thread get to 2K by the weekend. I’ve got the bunting ready.

Mad_Cyril

Dubman
Hope its gender-neutral and racially agnostic bunting Dubbers?

Dubman

Mad_Cyril
All sorted my man. Just hope the jelly sets in time. Don’t forget the Tennents Super

LT42

It’s not a defence, he’s just not easily offended. It’s not me who’s claiming all those who are gay are offended by it. That’s on you. Or were you just talking out of your arse hole again? (rhetorical question - links can be found online)

hugopal

303abuser the amount of practice it must take to be that obtuse is impressive. if only you were half as smart as you think you are. your logic is basically that you’re points are valid, not at all ignorant, and that every single other person here is projecting something onto you. if that’s not mental gymnastics to avoid a re-assessment of your own viewpoint, i don’t know what is.

I consider my viewpoints and I provide justification for them.

You provide nothing to support your posts.

You are performing very basic mental “gymnastics” when you try and dismiss me as a troll to avoid a re-assessment of your own viewpoint. I have tried to consider your posts and found them feeble as a house made of cards.

You are not actually “trying to have a conversation with me”, if you were, then you would not repeatedly misquote me and make accusations that are unjustified. If you were “trying to have a conversation” then you would make more effort to pay attention to what I had said, and you would make more effort to substantiate your empty posts.

If there is a troll here, it’s you; you even admitted to trying to “troll” me a few days ago. However, unlike your assessment of me, mine of yours is not as generous - I think you’re both a troll and an imbecile.

LT42

Great points, well made, 303.

303abuser

LT42 haha i still don’t know if we’re being trolled. it’s either a magnificent performance or possibly the thickest person i’ve ever tried to have a conversation with. i’m still kind of hoping for the former, as at least it would be funny.

Along_the_Wire

303abuser Doing a Flares

303abuser

Along_the_Wire at least flares occasionally made sense. with hugo, you can ask him if he simply likes the colour blue and get a three paragraph dissection of a completely different topic. and it’s wrong.

jonattonyeah

Homegrove

Posted this a bit ago with an @hugo given his posts about it being tied to BLM, while have no fucking clue as to what he was talking about (Shocker), and me pushing back. When it happened, those of us around here were like nahhhhhh that doesn’t pass the smell test for BLM blame. And wouldn’t you know…

LT42

Lol, indeed, Hugo. Apologies if your gay.

jonattonyeah

303abuser

Blue is gay. Therein lies the problem.

« Previous Page Next Page »