Just for clarification, and so there is absolutely no confusion:
Vegemite Moose, my last post was not directed at you, but the bleeding pussy above you who has trouble admitting his premature verbal ejaculation.
No problem Maureen I totally got that to begin with.
I was going to start this post with “No shit” but I thought that might drive my percentage of shit-related posts above the minimum.
Whoops.
Hmm. I don’t really follow you. If someone does an evil act, and no one knows about it, they’re still evil. If you place a moral value on thoughts, then if someone has an evil thought, and no one knows about it, they’d still be evil. And evil thoughts are much easier to hide than evil actions.
Now, I consider speech an action, so someone who goes around saying, “We should kill all the Jews,” is still evil, even if he never does any actuall Jew-killing, because he’s promoting an evil act. The difference I see here is that Evil Captor isn’t promoting rape, he’s promoting consensual sex that involves feigned rape/torture/whatever. But he’s been very clear on the consensual part. He’s not hurting anyone, and he’s not saying anyone should actually be hurt, he’s just saying he likes it when people pretend to be hurt. Which is wierd, but not immoral.
So let me get this straight.
Evil Captor wasn’t pitted because he likes bondage, just because he posts about it.
Don’t say constantly, because that has been thoroughly debunked.
If his posts were anti-bondage would you pit him for bringing up how much he doesn’t like bondage?
I think Evil Captor was pitted but Excalibre is an ass.
Whatever you say, guy.
This is a blatant falsehood; no one who posts as much as Evil Captor could possibly do it in every post. As I demonstrated, one of my central ‘obsessions’ here on the boards appears to net about 1% of my posts - but it’s something that’s been remarked upon by others. To claim that because he does not exclusively post about bondage doesn’t mean that he doesn’t post about the subject more than anyone else (he does - I’ve certainly proven that by pointing out that he’s made a sixth of the total references to bondage in the past year), that he doesn’t bring it up in situations where it’s not relevant to the discussion (he does), that he doesn’t post about it quite frequently (he does - he just posts rapidly enough that he can post about a subject every day or two and still let it account for only a fraction of his post total.) Other people have reputations for posting on certain subjects, without it being their sole all-consuming passion. To suggest that he doesn’t frequently post about bondage - and do so in threads relating to other matters - is false. It is a lie. Perhaps those of us who are bothered by it are a minority - that certainly appears to be the case - but it’s not as though I’m the first to notice it or start to expect it whenever I see his name in a Cafe Society post.
I’m not sure why you’re dismissing me here. Are you suggesting that what I said isn’t true? That I am part of some Vast Non-Bondage Conspiracy? If you would like to argue the merits of whether Evil Captor’s gratuitous sexual references are unpleasant or not, you may, but it’s a weak debate tactic to make ad hominem attacks suggesting that I’m only posting about this as a representative of some evil “We Hate the SDMB” club. It’s a lie as well, and a pretty blatant insult of me personally. Do you insult everyone who disagrees with you on anything?
Listen you cunt, I was writing my post at the same time you were. I did not post without bothering to read your post, I was writing mine at the same fucking time. For you to snarkily scold me for overlooking your post, while in fact the confusion was caused by your failure to notice the proximity of posting time, makes you asshole.
This still sounds like if you get away with it it’s not immoral.
We’re all responsible for our moral universes, which starts with who we are as a person. Who we are as a person starts with what goes on inside our head.
The rest of what you say is moral-relativist tapdancing.
If you can watch a movie that has, for a more extreme example to make the point, a storyline of a child being raped, killed, and eaten, and you get OFF on that, then you have some personal moral issues to deal with.
Just because your choice not to act on those fantasies prevents them from affecting other people doesn’t change that. Obviously, that’s another level of immoral. I have never said that my definition of morality in this context is measured by whether it hurts other people. The challenge of living a moral life is as much about the health of your own “soul” as it is about the souls of others. Moreso, in fact.
How you can say that fantasies of rape and dismemberment are morally null is utterly beyond me, unless you can’t separate morality from action.
lissener, I’ve started a GD thread about this topic, to avoid having this thread be split into a debate section and a swearing section. Your presence is requested.
lissener and maureen, that has got to be one of the most vicious exchanges I’ve seen here for the stupidest reason. Just because we can be complete assholes in the Pit doesn’t mean we have to.
Well, you forgot to mention that when you thought that your Pit thread wasn’t doing too weel, you went over to the “snark” board and posted over there asking for back-up from the members of that board.
Thank you. 
Sorry, joking. Yup, it was a stupid reason. But I thought lissener calling me a pompous asswipe simply because he was embarrassed was a bit of an overreaction. And since this is the Pit, I reacted with what I thought to be a proportional response. Certainly I don’t believe I garnered that kind of reaction for merely pointing out that I’d already apologized (and that apology was meant sincerely, btw) to the offended party. On top of which, how over the top is it to compare my post that EC was being pitted for liking bondage to “playing a race card”? I mean, damn. Histrionic much?
So. Sorry if I offended you, featherlou, or anyone when I pointed this out to the whiny pussy.
Excalibre, sorry about that last post, that was pretty pissy of me. FTR I’d had a few. :o Generally as a doper I have a fair amount of respect for you.
But as you said, it’s all about the bondage. The fact that he is posting about bondage is what is bothering you. Other posters are famous for talking about a subject frequently or bringing that subject up in threads where they don’t belong.
But you aren’t pitting them. You are pitting Evil Captor.
If you aren’t pitting other dopers for bringing up something all the time then it can only be what he brings up all the time.
And what is it that he brings up all the time?
Ummm… Bondage?
So you are pitting for the subject matter he brings up. You are pitting him for the bondage because you have a problem with his fantasy life. Other people bring up Star Trek or Monty Python or Terry Pratchit, or Douglas Adams, or George Bush or Bill Clinton ‘all’ the time but it is Evil Captor that is buggin you. Don’t try to pretend that you don’t have a problem with BSDM. What are you going to tell me next, that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and that if I pass this email along Bill Gates will send me to Disneyland?
And just because you’re not the only person to be bothered by something does not lend your complaints any validity. More than one person is bothered by inter-racial marriage. More than one person is in the Illinoise Nazi Party, (I hate those guys), more than one person belongs ot PETA. Doesn’t mean that they are right.
Look, if you have to make up a false justification for hating me, that’s your business. I can’t do anything more than what I’ve done in this thread - make it clear from the outset that I have no problem with what he enjoys or likes to fantasize about. After all, I was there only a few posts above defending so-called “deviant” sexual fantasies and practices, and I’ve acknowledged that I enjoy bondage and other activities that people find upsetting.
But if you want to assign me thoughts that I have manifestly never held, that I have made it clear that I don’t hold, and that I have argued against in this very thread, then fine. That makes you a moron, and it’s obviously not worth my time to try to discuss this with you any further, since you have already decided to disregard reality and assign me the motives that you find convenient.
I don’t think Doglas Adams was ever into bondage.
I haven’t read the whole thread (heck, I was skimming by the bottom of page 1), and I might not even bother reading replies to my comment here, but I wanted to interject a point from an uninterested observer’s point of view…
I’m not getting this “your screen name is a reference to bondage” thing at all. Maybe “Evil Captor” is some kind of standard bondage term the way “Mistress” is, and I’d know that if I wasn’t clueless, but the username just does not conjure up any bondage or sex imagery for me.
It is definitely an explicit reference to his bondage/slavegirl fetish. I’m not claiming that it’s obvious to anyone who sees his handle what he’s into, but he’s made references in posts to wanting to see women carried off by “Evil Captors.”
:snort:
I’ve responded to this in robertligouri’s GD thread, if you’re interested in persuing it.