Explain how that is hypocrisy, genius?
....only in Scotland
- Thread starter Wreford Miles
- Start date
Explain how that is hypocrisy, genius?
"I agree it's not without humour. It is just rife with shite humour. I am not averse to bad taste, but there are limits. Abuse-enabling "humour" is beyond mine. I would elaborate, but wouldn't want to be accused of "lecturing".
As for the Mary Whitehouse comment, I am not sure what you mean. There are three posts by other (male) members in this very thread raising objection in one way or another, yet I am apparently policing the internet. I made the link that the types of abuse are linked and expressed my concern that people find it funny. I don't ever recall saying it shouldn't have been posted/shared or that it should be censored. I just think it shapes people's opinions about sexual abuse. Read it, laugh at it, wank over it all you fucking like, but I will call them as I see them just the same.[/QUOTE]"
This forum has clearly breached your 'limits'....many times it would seem, looking at your posts. Please do feel free to leave
Are you the forum police, now, Harold?
Get over yourself, dude.
Let me help you out:
You're welcome.
Last edited:
This forum has clearly breached your 'limits'....many times it would seem, looking at your posts. Please do feel free to leave[/QUOTE]
Sounds like more than Auwyn trying to police the forums ...
Sounds like more than Auwyn trying to police the forums ...
No there aren't, genius. There's only one (Scotboxer). The other two, like you, didn't realise it was a spoof, although one suspected it.
Well, I would have thought that rather obvious. I think that your regular recourse to the c*** word and other vulgar sexual and abusive terms to describe people, and instructing people to w*** over satirical stories about drunken incest sit rather uneasily with your opinions on the relationship between sex and abuse.
For someone who takes such a clear and regular stance on sexual abuse, I am surprised you choose to denigrate people so regularly using vile sexual imagery.
I have no idea what you are saying, to be honest. You make no sense whatsoever.
I have no problem with swearing, nor people swearing. Even the C word. I use it a lot. Some people don't like it, so I try my hardest not to use it when with them, but as it is part of the mainstream on this forum, c'est la vie, right? Or are you now railing against swearing and use of the word **** on the forum?
I also try not to be abusive towards people, but some people - take Garrod for instance - really test that. I have, on occasion deleted something I have written because I thought it too offensive, when written down, but I acknowledge that I am fallible.
I emphasised your use of the word "instructed" as I am not sure that I have instructed anyone to do any such thing. You might want to go and read that. What I said was, people can go and do whatever they like in respect of the aforementioned article. If that means getting their rocks off whilst doing so, there is nothing I can do about that and that is unfortunately the way of the world. I am not sure whether your discomfort about my use of language is because I am female, because I don't see you campaigning against anyone else's use of the same kind of language. Maybe that's a bit about your reading comprehension though, because you clearly see things that arent there.
As for the comment about my "opinons on the relationship between sex and abuse" well, there is a very clear relationship between the two. There is a closer link between power and abuse, but that discussion, I think, is possibly for another day. I wonder if you meant that there is a link between swearing and abuse, to which I would like to reply fuck right off.
I have posted no sexual images. Again, you are seeing things that arent there.
My comments have nothing to do with your being female. I don't really like that sort of language in written form although I am prone to using it sometimes when speaking. I wouldn't really see myself as a prude either. I simply find it strange that you use tired old sexual imagery to insult people. You're right, I don't take others to task for this, but that's because they don't make such a regular stance on matters of sexual abuse. It has nothing to do with your gender.
As for "instructing", well, you did phrase those three verbs in the imperative, not the indicative. (Read it, laugh at it, w*** over it) so you were in fact instructing. However, I suppose that is just semantics, so my bad, as the young folks say.
Your closing comment I will take in the spirit in which (I hope) it was intended.
As for "instructing", well, you did phrase those three verbs in the imperative, not the indicative. (Read it, laugh at it, w*** over it) so you were in fact instructing. However, I suppose that is just semantics, so my bad, as the young folks say.
Your closing comment I will take in the spirit in which (I hope) it was intended.
Using sexual imagery does not mean posting images.
It means using simile or metaphor or non-literal description (c***, bellend etc)
Maybe not, but that's a great example of hypocrisy.
But you still haven't made the connection. Sexual abuse is not about swearing. It is about sex and power.
It's not semantics at all, it's you distorting what was written to shoehorn it to mean something that supports your argument. It's disingenuous. My words were written as an acceptance that people will do what they will. Not an instruction to go and do so. But you know that...or at least you would if you took the sentence in it's entirety.
Your closing comment I will take in the spirit in which (I hope) it was intended.
I bear you no ill will. I thought it was funny - see I do humour!
Using sexual imagery does not mean posting images.
It means using simile or metaphor or non-literal description (c***, bellend etc)
Maybe to you. To everyone else it means pictures or photos.
er, not to me.
that would be sexual images. sexual imagery is generally something else, although it could be applied to pictures.
OK, I will agree that mental imagery does not involve the sharing of images, but instead creates the images in one's mind. However, if one is able to create sexual imagery from someone calling someone else a fucking bellend, then one is distinctly (even Freudianly) obsessed.
I think you're still misunderstanding the literary term "imagery". As I said, it means using metaphor etc, not creating smutty pictures in one's head.
From an online dictionary:
I think that depends on how literally one interprets things. While it could be indicative of the kind of concrete thinking which is present in schizophrenia it's not necessarily the case. For example, I'm not fond of using 'cünt' as a term of abuse because I think it's degrading to women. I'm with the radical feminists who'd reclaim it as an acceptable term for female genitalia.
Does that go for "tit" or "bellend" or "prick" etc? I realise the c word is much much stronger but surely the principle is the same?
Is Auwyn somebody's alter ego?
Is Fanum up to mischief again?
Is Fanum up to mischief again?
Similar threads
