Put it this way: the antiwar poster whose opinions carry the most weight when it comes to military matters is Diogenes because he’s ex-military and his opinions come from a place of experience and wisdom. He has more to say than mere truisms like, “war is bad.”
That’s not what she said: she said there exist reasons to be looking at it other than jacking off, and ways of thinking about it more complex than that. You’re just making stuff up now.
No, I see her as naive because she posts almost entirely from theoretical sources, and in her case it stems, IMO form youth and lack of experience. As she grows and learns, she may well have the same opinions, but they will be, I believe, deepr and maturer because she will have had some experience of life.
Naivete is not the province solely of the young. There are older posters here, like December, who IMO are equally naive. I find December’s contributions to a debate embarrassing even though he’s on my side, because his opinions seem to be drawn entirely by uncritical quoting of conservative sources without judgement or evaluation.
Read the quote again. She’s discounting jacking off as a purpose of porn in favor of other ways of thinking about it. That is exactly how I read what she said.
I don’t discount her posts because of her youth, but I say that her posts reflect her youth.
And now my bf is throwing me off the computer, but this discussion will continue.
Wrong!
Just like there are plenty of reasons to go to the symphony other than to hear pretty music. She’s not saying those reasons are more important, she’s saying that they exist. How do you get your uncharitable interpretation out of the quotation you provided?
Frankly, I’m not surprised if it’s the case that she posts from entirely theoretical sources; a lot of times on this board, any life experiences we do post as support for our opinions are discounted as “anecdotal.” That’s why Hamish dislikes posting here a lot of the time: his opinions are almost entirely rooted in his experiences, reinforced by the experiences and research of others, and he’s scared (by experience, natch…) of being attacked for it.
And with that, I’m off too. I have a re-founding meeting of my constituency association I have to go run. (Now is that theory, or experience?)
A sizeable majority of peace advocates in the United States:
[snip list]
These are accusations that are hurled at us frequently (with the exception of the last one) as if we are all participants in one mob.
[/QUOTE]
That’s nice, what does your list have to do with anything I said? Are you pretending that I said something I didn’t? Why, yes, you are! I made no such accusations against you, so why do you pretend like I do in your response? Oh, I know, it’s because you’re a moron and figured I’d be dumb enough not to catch the fact that you’re either making stuff up or hallucinating.
“Now the pro-war side wants to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms,” with things like ‘pro-war people said something I disagree with’, ‘pro-war people boycotted a celebrity who insulted them,’ or ‘the Seattle police didn’t say please when they asked a man to stop breaking the law’ as support.
Then why did you cite an article complaining that the right to free assembly was being infringed because the police didn’t let violent protesters do what they want and because they didn’t say ‘please’ when they asked a man to stop breaking the law? If you’re going to offer a link in support of your views, then I’m going to accept it as supporting your views.
And what has been done to oppress those poor little Hollywood stars? Oh, boo-fucking-hoo, some people decided not to give their money to those stars. I feel so sorry, whatever will the idiot multimillionaires do with their lives now?
And what does that have to do with anything being discussed? Or is it just part of the random stuff that you throw in for no real reason?
What the fuck does this conversation have to do with Bush? Did you read the original post that I was responding to that claimed “Now the pro-war side wants to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms,” and the multiple times I’ve quoted it to try to bash that bit of information into your thick skull?
I don’t believe you. You posted an article that whined about how the police didn’t say ‘please’ when they told some asshole to stop breaking the law as evidence of our civil liberties being trampled, why in the Hell would I believe your characterization of those letters without the actual text in front of me. Plus, of course, those letters only show what some people on the “pro-war side” want to do, you’d need to show some evidence that they represent the majority of that side, since the original claim was (again) “Now the pro-war side wants to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms,” not ‘there are some idiots on the pro-war side, much like there are some idiots on the anti-war side’.
This thread is the very definition of jacking off.
You know, Riboflavin, I would have to look pretty far and wide on these boards to find another example as obvious of someone deliberately taking another poster’s words out of context and spoiling for a fight.
What the heck?
My opinion on porn comes from years of masterbation! When I managed to sign up for some pseudo-feminist anti porn class, I was the sole defender of pornography. They claimed it perpetuating violence against women. I claimed it provided me with many pleasurable hours in my life and they shouldn’t go around telling me that I don’t and shouldn’t enjoy it. The teacher (who also disagreed with me) came up with that book which managed to at least convince people that porn isn’t quite as straightforward as people make it out to be. Convinceing a room full of twenty year old self-styled feminist intellectuals (or a messege board full, for that matter) that whacking off to porn is a good thing is a whole other battle that frankly I don’t think I can win.
What exactly is it gonna take for me to have the right to an opinion in this place? Oh well, I guess I’ll go back to playing with my dolls and my copy of Das Capital…
You going to show us what context I supposedly dropped, or are you just lying and hoping no one calls you on it? This should be quite amusing.
A smaller number in the Y field on your birth certificate, apparently.
5 time champ
There are some on the pro-war side who want to take away first amendment rights, but then there are people on the anti-war side that want to take away even more basic rights, like the right to have the country governed through democracy, rather than mobs.
Pantom
How so? Have this nation reached the point where a few dozen casualties must be the result of “badly underestimatation”?
Zoe
They just want cheap oil.
They support an illegitimate president (as in not elected, not a bastard, although I’m sure they think that too).
They are the “real terrorists”.
BTW, this even sven stuff is, besides a hijack, incredibly rude.
Sigh, although I know that talking to hostile, stupid folks is pretty much pointless, Here goes.
How about the part where I say:
Which you seem to think means:
Do you not see not only the difference is what was said, but the complete escalation of nasty tone?
Not only are you 100% not understanding what I wrote, but you responded with hostility to what was a moderate position on my part. Look, this is exactly how folks with different views polarize on issues. Pretty sad really.
You do realize that anyone can go back upthread and read my post, and then notice the amazing fact that the words from me that you quoted were in direct response to other words from you and not from the words you quoted? I was responding to the part where you offered a link to a pit thread where people told war protestors to shut up as evidence that “Now the pro-war side wants to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms: freedom of speech and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Note that I helpfully quoted that line in my original response to make it clear what I was talking about, and quoted the part where you linked to the pit thread as a cite supporting that line. The only one dropping context is you.
Do you not see that the words you quoted from me were in response to different words from you than what you quoted? But somehow I’m the one dropping context because I responded to what you wrote, but didn’t make sure that each paragraph can be paired up with any text from any of your posts and appear to be in context. Yeah, I’m so fucking terrible. Why don’t you just shut the hell up before you make a bigger fool of yourself? Oh, woops, I guess telling you to shut up means I want “to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms: freedom of speech and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Damn, I’m an oprressor now.
This is the pit, moron. I’m not posting in the pit for reasoned debate, I’m posting in the pit for flaming. If all of the ‘help, help, I’m being repressed’ crowd would actually debate this stuff when they repeat it in GD, I wouldn’t come here, but none of you do, do you? If you had provided a vaguely sensible argument in support of your position I would have just argued, but you offered the ‘police don’t say please’ article and ‘someone said something I don’t like’ thread as evidence that “Now the pro-war side wants to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms: freedom of speech and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
I do not consider the position that the police have to say ‘please’ when they tell you to stop committing a crime, or the position that saying ‘shut up’ to someone is oppression, anything remotely resembling moderate.
What’s sad is that you believe that someone excercising their free speech in a manner you don’t approve of and the police not saying ‘please’ when they tell someone to stop breaking the law is evidence that "Now the pro-war side wants to take away from Americans the most fundamental freedoms: freedom of speech and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
But dude, you are still not reading. When I posted those links (as quick things that I pulled out of the air) I specifically stated:
Also, do you not see the difference between me stating that pro-war folks are telling me to shut up vs. they are trying to take my rights away? You seem to be quick to accuse me of lying or trying to take your posts out of context, which is quite far from the truth.
Also, as to your “this is the Pit and so I don’t have to be polite” business, I guess that I will say that just because you can do something, does not mean that you should. If you are spoiling to fight, that is cool, but it is clear that your anger is impairing your reading abilities.
Anyway, this is the point where I realize that no matter what you are not going to hear me and ignore you like a buzzing gnat.