Covington Catholic High (in case it hasn't been mentioned already)

[Dewey_Finn]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

The Sandmann kid got out in front of this and doxxed himself with the help of a PR firm before anyone else leaked his name.

I thought what he did was very smart. I think the PR types have a phrase “control the narrative” and that’s exactly what he did. His statement claimed that he wasn’t being offensive, but just stood there, not saying anything. So perhaps he was innocent. But you have to admit; the widely circulated photo of him made him look very smug.

[octopus]

@Airbeck

Just as long as you are aware that the phenomenon you are describing is a human thing, not a political side thing.

I thought the outrage over Kaepernick’s refusing to stand was a bit silly. I don’t like coerced conformity or patriotism.

[Airbeck]

@octopus

I thought the outrage over Kaepernick’s refusing to stand was a bit silly. I don’t like coerced conformity or patriotism.

I did as well. So we agree people on both sides of the aisle can overreact to things.

[doorhinge]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

Classic bullshit tactic - when you can’t defend what is said (because it’s indefensible), shift the conversation to your right to say it, even though that right was never under threat to begin with. That way, you stop needing to defend it. Exactly the kind of argument I’d expect from a disingenuous shitbag like doorhinge. Why, exactly, do we tolerate his presence here? He literally never posts anything worth reading and if he were banned, the result would be a better forum.

But these are a bunch of pasty-white conservative brats going to a private prep school.

Rich white conservative kids…

They’re still rich white kids…

They’re going to just be another group of shitty rich white kids learning that their actions don’t really have consequences.

and unlike rich white kids,…

because our society is really fucking bad at teaching rich white kids that lesson.

(post shortened)

Gosh, your post makes you appear to be just another racist. Yawn.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@doorhinge

(post shortened)

Aww, did I trigger a snowflake? Here, let me shorten it even further so that you can pay attention to the part that matters:

Why, exactly, do we tolerate his [doorhinge’s] presence here? He literally never posts anything worth reading and if he were banned, the result would be a better forum.

[doorhinge]

@BobLibDem

You seem to have a persecution complex. Very few people hate all Christians, they hate the phony kind that Smirkiepoo Sandmann represents- rich motherfuckers who have nothing better to do with their time than try to tell women what to do with their bodies. Assholes that chant “Build the wall!” when confronted with people who don’t share their skin color, worship differently than they do, or love people of the same gender.

Very few people hate someone because of the clothes they wear. Except when the clothes are a white hood, or the modern equivalent- the MAGA hat. Wearing a MAGA hat is like a flashing neon sign proclaiming to the world: “I’m a bigoted moron who hates everyone who doesn’t look like me!”

(post shortened)

Looking at the quoted part of my post that you quoted in yours, which item was incorrect?

I especially enjoyed your statement of, “Very few people hate someone because of the clothes they wear. EXCEPT when the clothes are a white hood, or the modern equivalent- the MAGA hat”. Isn’t that another way of saying, “Some people may hate this teenager because of the clothes he wore”.

[doorhinge]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

Aww, did I trigger a snowflake? Here, let me shorten it even further so that you can pay attention to the part that matters:

Why, exactly, do we tolerate his [doorhinge’s] presence here? He literally never posts anything worth reading and if he were banned, the result would be a better forum.

I believe you may just have doubled down on a website rules violation. But then it’s not my circus, and it’s not my monkeys.

You seem very angry. Perhaps you should see someone professionally in order to work out your anger issues? Or not.

[Kyomara]

@BigT

Virtue signaling is a right wing term that means the person doesn’t actually believe what they are saying, and are just saying it to signal their own personal righteousness.

So it inherently means the outrage is fake, used only to make them look better.

In practice, it is used primarily as an ad honinem attack against liberals when they make moral claims. It is used against any moral argument as a way to invalidatei

I propose that those of us on the left shouldn’t use this term, as it only helps validate a worldview where morals are just arbitrary words used to support political ideas. Such is the same reason for popularizing “politically correct,” “SJW,” etc. All are about saying that liberals don’t really mean what they say.

Even if you think there is a real concept buried under the bad usage, it’s not worth validating the bad usage. And any argument that a statement is empty rhetoric should be backed up, not just dismissed with a thought terminating cliche.

I feel really strong about this attempt by the right to modify our language to fit their ideas. I think it is a large part of the spread of the otherwise obviously bad fascistic alt-right.

I don’t directly dispute your understanding of the term, but my experience has been different. My progressive friends introduced me to the term and we regularly apply it to the actions of people on both the left and the right.

I agree with you about deliberately charged language, which is why I avoid shitty terms like SJW, PC, mansplain, etc. Virtue signaling does seem to be something practiced by people of all political persuasions, in my experience.

[Nars_Glinley]

@Czarcasm

Lying sack of shit troll says what?
The fact that you think your unimaginative and juvenile reinterpretation would be a reasonable scenario tells us all we need to know about the value of your posts.

Zombies aren’t known for their braaaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnssssssssss.

[doorhinge]

@Dewey_Finn

But you have to admit; the widely circulated photo of him made him look very smug.

(post shortened)

OMG! You think he looked smug? How dare he! Did you come to that conclusion based on the facial expressions of your friend, or family? The teenager didn’t do anything wrong. He just stood there. The teenager didn’t say a word. He just stood there. How dare he ignore being targeted by an old man AND THE OLD MAN’S ENTOURAGE OF ALLEDGED ADULTS!

The old man, and his entourage, didn’t try to bully the Black Hebrew Israelites. The old man, and his entourage, targeted the white teenager because of his clothes.

The steps of the Lincoln Memorial are wide enough for the entire brigade of Princess Patricia Canadian Light Infantry to march up in short order, but this particular offenderati crew chose to bully a teenager because they wanted to claim his spot as their own.

[Airbeck]

Targeted? The Vietnam vet walked between the groups because he thought things were getting out of hand and wanted to help de-escalate.

Targeted? Jesus Christ the delusion is strong

[doorhinge]

@Measure_for_Measure

In your mind. The camera does a pan. It shows the kid in one position during the pan… and another when it returns to him. The kid moved.

(post shortened)

Or the videographer moved which would change the camera’s viewing angle. :eek:

[doorhinge]

@Airbeck

Targeted? The Vietnam vet walked between the groups because he thought things were getting out of hand and wanted to help de-escalate.

Targeted? Jesus Christ the delusion is strong

Did I use the wrong word, or an un-PC word? Or hurt your feelings?
*targeted
adjective [ before noun ] uk ​ /ˈtɑːɡɪtɪd/ us ​ MARKETING, POLITICS

directed at a particular group or activity:

targeted advertising/marketing/tax cuts

It will take more targeted initiatives to bring the poverty level down dramatically.*

targeted

Not according to the Cambridge Dictionary.

The old man, and his entourage, walked past the Black Hebrew Israelites, and targeted the teenager. Thanks for playing.

[Czarcasm]

@doorhinge

(post shortened)

Or the videographer moved which would change the camera’s viewing angle. :eek:

Or you’re full of shit.

[Airbeck]

@doorhinge

Did I use the wrong word, or an un-PC word? Or hurt your feelings?

You are a reprehensible person. Is your mother proud of how you turned out?

[raventhief]

@LAZombie

All I saw was an obese white woman with too much makeup and unnatural hair color. Perhaps, she was asking where the nearest buffet was and the boys suggested she eat a salad.

Is there more to this video?

I keep coming back to how thoroughly this post conflicts with reality. She wasn’t obese, she wasn’t heavily made up and she’s a blonde. Not that any of that matters on terms of “did she deserve the abuse she received” ( hint- the answer is no)

It’s bizarre.

[Morgyn]

My ignore list is getting longer and longer.

[raventhief]

@Morgyn

My ignore list is getting longer and longer.

Mine too.

[Morgyn]

@raventhief

Mine too.

<fist bump of solidarity>

[RTFirefly]

@MandaJo

There is a legitimate gray area about appropriate supervision for kids that age. I mean, they are old enough to drive, have a job . . . IME, it’s pretty normal to let a group of kids that age wander in an area (like, around the Lincoln Memorial) for a while, as long as you have cell numbers, they use the buddy system, and there’s a solid meet up time. I take kids to colleges for events all the time, and I let them go outside to play Frisbee or walk over to the student union to get a coke. When they get off the bus after the field trip, I let them get on public transportation or walk home by themselves.

I think these kids were shits, and there’s evidence that the school has a culture of reinforcing shitty behavior, but I don’t think that you have to have eyes on a 16-year olds at all times on a field trip.

What size groups are you talking about? All male, or mixed?