Der Trihs Pitting du jour

[MrDibble]

@XT

So, in other words you aren’t interested in context.

The context doesn’t change the actual quote itself in any way, and as it stands, it’s horrible enough. The context doesn’t actually give any room to insert the words “in the same way” into the quote.

I’ll try and remember that and quote something from you in the future that without any context to what you were actually discussing and see how you like it.

Like that hasn’t been done to me here?

It’s not my belief either, and you have misunderstood what I was saying.

I might have, but the rest of your post doesn’t seem to be overturning that.

…and in your whole post here you are either deliberately misunderstanding the context the subject is being discussed under or you simply don’t care. Basically, some discussions are going to insult some people. That’s the price of having a discussion about sensitive subjects.

Agreed

However, if I make an insulting remark at a group of people, say Liberals, where I say all Liberals are fluffy headed idiots and also evil, demented assholes, when I know that there are Liberals in the thread I’m engaged in debating in, well, that certainly skirts the rules (well, it would if we changed ‘Liberals’ to ‘Conservatives’ or ‘Christians’…or, your own favorite, ‘Americans’)

Aah, I see, so this is less about what I said just now, and more about me and things I’ve said in the past, yes?

, but it would be a directed insult.

Agreed, and it’s the Mod’s job to be able to tell when the “insult the group” rule is being used as a smokescreen. I’m not sure DT always uses it that way, though - as near as I can tell, he mostly uses group insults to insult the group itself, not the poster he’s arguing with specifically. And that goes with the rule’s intended sense, which as far as I can tell is so that people can’t use “You insulted a group that I’m a member of” as a way to shut down any debate they don’t like.

No, it’s not…it’s the key difference.

No, it isn’t. When it comes to insult, perception is all.

In case you really don’t get it, it’s the difference between discussing something that might insult someone and directing an insult that is intentionally meant to be an insult by insulting, directly, a group that your opponents happen to belong too.

I get that that’s what you think the difference is. I’m disagreeing that the TG example is the former, not the latter.

Let me use an example; when I say Scientologists are delusional, yes, I’m having a discussion that is by-the-way insulting a group (your fist case), but my use of the word “delusional” vs a less-loaded term (say, “mistaken”) is very much a direct insult to that group. So it is for using the words “mental illness” and “delusional” to refer to TGs - there is no way that is just “wrong” and not an “intentional insult”.

I don’t know or care if they intended to insult.

Then what’s the point of pedanting all over the supposed distinction?

:smack: Ok, maybe you really don’t get it. No, I don’t think they are shy about pointing it out. YET THE FUCKING THREADS CONTINUE AND PERSIST BECAUSE WHILE IT MIGHT BE INSULTING TO THE BOARD THEISTS IT’S STILL A VALID DISCUSSION. And they SHOULD, too, because it IS a valid discussion, even if it’s insulting to people who associate themselves with theism.

I’m not disagreeing with you that those are valid discussions. I’m saying that that doesn’t make pointing out perceived insults a verboten thing to do.

Sure. And it’s the horseshit that DT has used to skate the rules for years now…a decade really. He just jumps into a discussion and flames a group of people (who happen to be the ones he’s butting heads against in a discussion)…but, you know, we is stupid and don’t get that when he flames said group in the worst possible terms that he REALLY means us. Sure we don’t.

It seems you really don’t, or how often is the response to his “The Right hates brown people” the following: “Are you saying all Rightists hate brown people?” - which completely misses the point (and verges on logical fallacy).

But overall, yeah…starting a thread in GD saying, resolved, there is no God would simply be a discussion point.

That wasn’t the thread I suggested…

Now, if I’m in a thread having a heated debate with several theists and I haul off and say ‘people who believe in God are delusional’, I’d rightfully be modded for it…well, unless I’m DT, in which case (at least before) I’d get a pass. Just attacking a group after all…nothing to do with those theists I’m arguing with. No sir.

So there are examples of DT doing this exact thing … and this is the important bit …as a response to a heated discussion with theists where it isn’t his first response but rather his comeback when he gets heated? Because that’s your implication, and my observation is that it is, in fact, just his boilerplate observation about theists.

Which gore is oxing you?

:rolleyes: at you and Shodan bot - not how Liberals are on the same side of the equation as Libertarians.

Oh, I’m sure what you MEAN is that it’s about choice verse innate predilection

Yes, and you know that’s what I mean - but let’s see where your rhetoric takes you…

, but the reality is whether or not you care about the subject enough to be offended when someone on the other side tosses out disparaging remarks…and how it’s done.

Nope. For instance, I care about liberal issues but I could give two shits that someone does a group insult of liberals.It really is just about which are choices and which aren’t.

Not hard for me to see the difference either…it’s all about gores and oxes. Whether someone has choice about what’s under discussion (i.e. you are born hispanic or black, born gay, etc, or you choose to be a liberal or a theist) is beside the point.

Nope, I don’t agree.

[MrDibble]

@Shodan

It’s kind of creepy to think about. I am a member in good standing of a message board where at least some of the members admire crazy hate speech, and agree with it on some level.

… said the racist …

[Shodan]

@Cyros

Except those seem to be mischaracterisation of what** Der Trihs** actually says. You may be able to find something to back up the way he speaks of Christians, but most times I see him post he specifically says “Good Christians” and defines that term as those who follow all of the injunctions in the bible. I won’t weigh in on the correctness of his thought but I do think that this differs from your claim that he says “all Christians are evil monsters”.

Since you believe that “most times” he exempts good Christians from his rants, could you cite a few times in which he has made the distinction? That is, show us three or four times that he makes some crazy anti-Christian rant but says specifically that it does not apply to good Christians who follow all the injunctions in the Bible.

Of course it is possible that I am misremembering. But I don’t think it is accurate to say that he draws the distinction you say he does “most times”.

Regards,
Shodan

[Malacandra]

@Shodan

Since you believe that “most times” he exempts good Christians from his rants, could you cite a few times in which he has made the distinction? That is, show us three or four times that he makes some crazy anti-Christian rant but says specifically that it does not apply to good Christians who follow all the injunctions in the Bible.

In fact, most times when Der is off on one, he is particularly talking about “good Christians who do what the Bible says”.

[magellan01]

@MrDibble

… said the racist …

Shodan is a racist? Can you share some posts that support that accusation.

[Shodan]

@magellan01

Can you share some posts that support that accusation.

No offense, but I think you are missing the point.

Accusations of racism are (often) used to derail a discussion. The poster to whom you are responding is trying to change the subject away from Der Trihs to something he feels will get support.

That’s the purpose of the endless threads in ATMB about whether “racist” is an insult or not. People want to use that to shut off discussion. It changes the focus away from whatever they don’t want to talk about, to trying to get someone to prove they aren’t a racist. And no proof is going to be good enough.

Feel free to carry on if you wish, as long as you don’t expect much. The idea is to change the topic away from something he doesn’t want to discuss (Der Trihs’ crazy ranting) and on to “anyone who says anything about race except to agree with me should be banned”.

Regards,
Shodan

[armedmonkey]

@Malacandra

In fact, most times when Der is off on one, he is particularly talking about “good Christians who do what the Bible says”.

No he’s fucking not. The guy does not have the ability to even come close to making distinctions. The dude is goddamn nuts. I honestly don’t get why anybody defends him. What I hear is shit like: “His point about the vast majority of rape cases being false accusations really makes you think, and I’m glad we have him here to put forth these ideas. He really makes you think. Besides, he’s only talking about the women who have vaginas” That’s bullshit.

Der Trihs is a bigot, plain and simple. He is a neck bearded “men’s rights” advocate with personal issues that manifest as militant atheism, hatred of any form of authority, and disturbingly deep misogyny.

[Cyros]

@Shodan

Since you believe that “most times” he exempts good Christians from his rants, could you cite a few times in which he has made the distinction? That is, show us three or four times that he makes some crazy anti-Christian rant but says specifically that it does not apply to good Christians who follow all the injunctions in the Bible.

Of course it is possible that I am misremembering. But I don’t think it is accurate to say that he draws the distinction you say he does “most times”.

Regards,
Shodan

Since this is the Pit and I can’t be assed to spend the 15 minutes on this that it would take to pull up a cite, naw, I don’t think I will. Especially as you can’t grasp the distinction between what I said and your mischaracterization (hint: **DT **doesn’t *exempt *“good Christians”).

[Steophan]

@magellan01

Shodan is a racist? Can you share some posts that support that accusation.

All right wingers are automatically racist, hadn’t you heard? I’ve been told that plenty of times on this board.

[Karrius]

@magellan01

Shodan is a racist? Can you share some posts that support that accusation.

He went into the thread complaining about the racism towards Miss America, and made racist jokes. Because he’s not really racist, so he can make racist cracks, you understand. It’s just in good fun because he’s not a real racist, no sir. Mind you, he’ll also gladly argue that it’s non-white people who are the real racist in multiple threads, and make fun of people complaining about racism they face, because clearly that’s a hilarious topic to him.

Of course, you likely don’t think that’s racist because you’re even more racist than he is.

[armedmonkey]

@Karrius

racist

I’ve noticed you use that word a a lot. Like a lot a lot. I think about 40% of your total posts contain that word.

[Karrius]

@armedmonkey

I’ve noticed you use that word a a lot. Like a lot a lot. I think about 40% of your total posts contain that word.

Keep in mind magellan is somebody who doesn’t think brazil and his friends are all that bad, and have a point. It is 100% justified in his case. Shodan is a little more subtle (for Shodan, at least) about it.

[armedmonkey]

I’m not defending Magellan, understand, and I’m sure as hell not defending Brazil. Our friend with the South American username possesses weapons grade stupidity. It’s just that you’re a bit of a one trick pony. I’m not sure you have the ability to post without calling somebody or something racist. It’s all you ever do.

[Shodan]

@Cyros

Since this is the Pit and I can’t be assed to spend the 15 minutes on this that it would take to pull up a cite, naw, I don’t think I will. Especially as you can’t grasp the distinction between what I said and your mischaracterization (hint: **DT **doesn’t *exempt *“good Christians”).

Well, OK, my apologies for misunderstanding you. But the point more or less stands - Der Trihs does not make distinctions. I cannot recall even one instance in which he made an attempt to qualify his broad brush rants aimed at any of his pet enemies.

You said he did it “most times”. I would be surprised to see an example of him doing it even once. Look at the examples sleestak provided - I don’t anywhere that Der Trihs exempts anyone from his “religious believers are irrational by definition” or “the anti-abortion movement only cares about making the woman suffer as much as possible”.

Regards,
Shodan

[armedmonkey]

And Karrius, I also don’t understand why you try to defend Der Trihs. How can you be so pissed of about racial prejudice and defend religious and gender prejudice? Be consistent, man.

[Karrius]

@armedmonkey

And Karrius, I also don’t understand why you try to defend Der Trihs. How can you be so pissed of about racial prejudice and defend religious and gender prejudice? Be consistent, man.

My thoughts on Der Trihs is basically -

He is really stupid when it comes to gender stuff, really, really stupid, although not MRA stupid (not that this is any real defense). I would like the opportunity to try to sit down and talk him out of this bullshit, but I’m sure not going to try to do it on a public message board, so that’s never going to happen. I cringe at this. At the same time, he’s still less stupid than a lot of “posters in good standing” on this message board, so it’s hard to really signal him as being all that bad, when he’s routinely surrounded by, and arguing against, worse. I have very mixed feelings here I cannot properly put into words.

I don’t really mind the religious stuff. Call me a bad person if you like, but frankly Christian religions are way too coddled in this country, even when they do horrible, horrible things. When major anti-abortion groups have ties to murderers and terrorists, and they’re still largely accepted by society at large, when republican politicians literally talk about setting up concentration camps, when Christians oppress and harass minorities, and there is never any real political blowback then there is something hugely fucking wrong. I am willing to accept the hate and vitriol if it means fighting against that bullshit that kills people and makes people live in fear. People need to stop using their religion as an excuse to hurt others, and stop giving bullshit “Well, I’m trying to change things from the inside” as an excuse to avoid their culpability in events while they do nothing.

My point is also more that Der Trihs isn’t any worse than shit like brazil who brings “Well black people are just stupid!” into threads on the education system completely unnecessarily, and is always dishonest about his shit. Yet people constantly complain Der Trihs isn’t banned, call it liberal bias, etc, etc, and… some of them outright support brazil. It’s the bullshit “We Christians are so oppressed!” whine that is loved by the right wing, while ignoring the people they’re battering and oppressing themselves. If we’re going to ban him, there’s a list of people that ought to be nuked first. I wouldn’t complain about it, as long as it was one step in a push to actually improving the board by trying to reduce noise.

[armedmonkey]

Karrius the thing you don’t understand is that the people who defend Der Trihs are just as stupid as the ones that defend Brazil. Somebody says something horribly hateful and prejudiced and the only people who defend that are the people who share the same prejudices. It’s not that Brazil and Der Trihs are on opposite sides of the same coin. They’re on the same side of the hate/not hate coin. When you defend Der Trihs you are no different from the people who defend Brazil. You’re defending hatred.

[Karrius]

@armedmonkey

Karrius the thing you don’t understand is that the people who defend Der Trihs are just as stupid as the ones that defend Brazil. Somebody says something horribly hateful and prejudiced and the only people who defend that are the people who share the same prejudices. It’s not that Brazil and Der Trihs are on opposite sides of the same coin. They’re on the same side of the hate/not hate coin. When you defend Der Trihs you are no different from the people who defend Brazil. You’re defending hatred.

Hatred can be justified.

I hate the people that work to restrict the rights of my friends, and make them suffer.

I hate the people who cause innocent women to die by refusing to let them have life-saving abortions, even when the fetus is nonviable.

I hate the priest from my old church who said it was OK to threaten to kill gay people, because that’s “just trying to help them”.

I’m willing to accept arguments that somebody shouldn’t be hated for whatever reason, but I refuse to accept the hippie “Never hate anybody, hate is always bad!”

Nope. Some people deserve to be hated.

[armedmonkey]

@Karrius

but I refuse to accept the hippie “Never hate anybody, hate is always bad!”

I wasn’t saying that, ya idiot, but if you want to stand by your own prejudices, fine. I got football to watch today, and don’t really care.

War Eagle.

[Dissonance]

@armedmonkey

No he’s fucking not. The guy does not have the ability to even come close to making distinctions. The dude is goddamn nuts.

This, particuarly the goddamn nuts part. The beliefs he holds about Christians, Rebublicans, etc is so comical, irrational and exagerated that’s it’s fucking absurd. He’s got some serious screws loose and can’t see that he does. I really do mean comical, the way he portrays them, and I think honestly believes them to be, are as comic book villians. Not as people who he disagrees with politically or philosophically, but as evil super-villians.

@Karrius

My thoughts on Der Trihs is basically -

He is really stupid when it comes to gender stuff, really, really stupid, although not MRA stupid (not that this is any real defense). I would like the opportunity to try to sit down and talk him out of this bullshit, but I’m sure not going to try to do it on a public message board, so that’s never going to happen. I cringe at this.

Yeah, good luck with that. You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. He’s a misogynist. Period.

My point is also more that Der Trihs isn’t any worse than shit like brazil who brings “Well black people are just stupid!” into threads on the education system completely unnecessarily, and is always dishonest about his shit. Yet people constantly complain Der Trihs isn’t banned, call it liberal bias, etc, etc, and… some of them outright support brazil.

This is one of the stupidest defenses I’ve ever seen. Brazilnut is a fucking nutbag. He lives in his own delusional word where he banninates people from the internet. He made a blog to list the people he’s banninated forever from the internet. He’s certifiably insane, immune to reason, and universally considered a joke. The only person I’ve ever seen leap to his aid is magellan01 who is an idiot in his own right, but even he had the excuse of not knowing brazilnut’s posting history before leaping to his defense.

Your defense of DT is that he’s no worse than a blithering nutjob? Color me unimpressed.