multitool
Pharaoh
Funnily enough, most of all from you.
Never any in-topic commentary. Just sanctimonious and pompous comments about how others are posting.
Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Funnily enough, most of all from you.
Never any in-topic commentary. Just sanctimonious and pompous comments about how others are posting.
bobzmyunkle
Senior Member
The implication of your post was obvious. Once again you are hiding behind 'i never said it'.
By posting that link when you did you implied that the women at the conference were comparable to the Nazis.
By extension you implied that the whole of the women's movement is comparable the the Nazis.
By extension you implied that many of my family and friends are comparable to the Nazis.
monkers
Legendary Member
Ok you are all fooking Nazis! Feel better now? You just needed to hear somebody say it didn't you? Now you can go around saying that some random woman on the internet called you a Nazi for wishing to deny other people their fundamental human rights which are guaranteed to them under international law. But now you feel more certain that you are right because you actually bullied somebody into calling you a Nazi, and you can cherry-pick and quote me. Well done.
Last edited:
bobzmyunkle
Senior Member
I see what you did there. Your method of argument is completely odious.
Anyhow, I've said what I had to say. Over and out.
multitool
Pharaoh
Ian H
Legendary Member
My two younger children 'boycotted' Harry Potter many years ago when they were kids. The reason being that their unpleasant cousins were fans. I don't think they called it 'cancelling' then.
Without referencing any individual, I'm happy to separate art from the artist. But if the artist is alive & still making money from their work it gets morally more complicated. I'd draw the line at those causing harm to others (however you might define that).
Without referencing any individual, I'm happy to separate art from the artist. But if the artist is alive & still making money from their work it gets morally more complicated. I'd draw the line at those causing harm to others (however you might define that).
OP
OP
theclaud
Reading around the chip
AuroraSaab
Squire
Frankie hasn't been averse to posting a few nasty tweets about the trans community in the past himself. I'd post them here but they are pretty offensive. Changed his tune when it suited him to have something to criticise Ricky Gervais about.
Ian H
Legendary Member
How would you define 'offensive'?
AuroraSaab
Squire
Language used for transwomen. Especially the 'balls deep' tweet. You can find them if you google. Frankie's view is that he's learned and grown as a person since.
winjim
Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
Boyle isn't talking about trans people in that clip, he's talking about Scottish independence and making a point about listening to the opinions of privileged rich people.
FWIW I think he went through a period of very lazy writing but seems to have come out the other side of it better.
FWIW I think he went through a period of very lazy writing but seems to have come out the other side of it better.
Ian H
Legendary Member
I wasn't asking specifically about Boyle, it was a general question.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
From the poster who has made a habit of attacking the way people who disagree with you post I will take that as a compliment from an expert in the field. I have never, nor will ever, claim the moral superiority implied by throwing out descriptions such as fascist at people whose views I dislike. I may have a view that people who do are a pita, but, while that may just be my pomposity, I am not sure that qualifies as the correct meaning of sanctimony.
I will reply to posts on the increasingly rare occasions when I believe my contributions add to the discussion or are not going round in the same point-scoring circles. As I have got older I am ever more aware of my fallibility in being able or qualified to judge the moral right in many situations, and prefer to leave it to those people who are so sure they have all the answers to the evils of the world that they can throw around the isms at the drop of a hat on internet forums.
icowden
Squire
Wired is a major American games reviewing website owned by Condé nast. It's not read *that* much anymore as they paywalled it.
They are hardly taking on a billionaire. All they are doing is virtue signalling.
multitool
Pharaoh
Ah, 'virtue signalling', that rhetorical device to impute selfish and vain motives to people's words. It is by definition an ad hominem.
How do you know they don't really mean it and are in bad faith?
Last edited:
