uh, ok chattywine, the woman was indeed acting moronic when she didn’t look before a lane change and was acting the bitch when she just drove away. No one has an argument with that! But her weight has nothing to do with hitting his car- it was just stuck in superfluously.
Maybe her lifestyle had something to do with it.
Blowero - you are confusing CC with the person in the other car/fat lady thread.
Jesus Christ jackass, can you really be this fucking hypocritical? Shall I do a search and post your numerous, NUMEROUS slurs you have made against other posters including your vaginal slurs (weird for a homo) which have included, although not been limited to the words “twat” and “cunt”.
As soon as I think you can not be anymore stupid, you prove me wrong.
I’m with the OP on this one. As soon as I saw the title of the thread he references, I predicted that all responses would be ignoring the OP’s main point and harp on the reference to her being fat. Of course, my prediction was tiresomely correct. It’s quite sad how sensitive people are.
Miller
Actually, you’re wrong. If someone calls someone else fat and then some kneejerking sociopath like Mockingbird calls them an intolerant piece of shit (or whatever) then I (once I’ve recovered from the temporary blindness caused by overexposure to unintentional irony) would think far worse of Mockingbird than I would of the person who originally provoked him by using “fat” as an insult.
In my opinion, there are varying shades of bigotry. For instance it is far worse to be a racist than it is to be a “sizeist”. A person can, in my opinion, be far worse things than a “sizeist”. For instance they can be a bilious little cunt like Mockingbird.
If you are going to demonstrate that someone is being inconsiderate to another persons feelings, it is imperative that you at least attempt to be halfway civil whil doing so. Otherwise, as seems to be happening to Mockingbird, people will think the offendee is a far uglier person than the offender and start believing this nonsense about there being a PC police who clamp down mercilessly whenever anyone steps out of line. They’ll think this because, well, Mockingbird is an asshole who clamps down mercilessly whenever anyone steps out of line.
Here’s a practical example, I recently opened a Pit thread about Weirddave because he wished cancer on someone. This is a very sensitive issue for me and I was offended. I decided to open the thread to address the issue but remained polite at all times. Here’s a link to the thread and my OP:
The admonition was civil and as a result the thread remained civil and I gained a greater understanding of Weirddave’s position on the matter (although I still disagree with it). Issues were addressed, grievances were aired, Baby Jesus smiled.
However, had I run my OP through the Mockingbirdiser and posted something like this
Do you think the thread would have been as civil? Or do you think it would have degenerated into a nasty pileon with me emerging as an A grade asshole?
Now, you may think that being “sizeist” is far worse than wishing cancer on someone and as such Mockingbird was perfectly justified in acting like a shithead whereas I wouldn’t have been.
However, to those of us who are not in the PC police, it is a matter of perception. Personally, I think that wishing cancer on someone, even a scumbag like Fred Phelps, is far worse than calling someone fat. To my mind, wishing cancer on someone is in the same league as wishing someone’s children die of AIDS or wishing rape on someone. I honestly cannot think of a more heinous insult that “I wish cancer on you”. However, my strong views on the matter did not shine through in my mild rebuke of an OP. Had Mockingbird been able to contain his views then he would have been able to get his point across (and it’s a point I wholeheartedly agree with BTW) without spawning another thread dedicated to how reprehensible his behaviour was, which is distracting from the original issue and adding more weight to the myth that the PC police rule this board with an iron fist.
Mockingbird’s vile and intolerant way of reacting to perceived offence does nothing more than increase the intolerance on these boards. It backfires. It’s a lousy way of making your point and it makes you look like a cunt, which is a far worse thing to be than a “sizeist”.
In other words, be polite or shut the fuck up and get lost because you’ll only do your position harm by acting like a prick.
I agree without reservation. And he still hasn’t explained what my further stupidity was.
I’m tired of the PC Police period.
It’s intentional irony, idiot.
I’ll pss on your offer to STFU, as I’m sure you’ll pass on my offer to KMA.
Obviously you have no clue on what a sociopath is. In context with the rest of your post this is not surprising.
You’re not only a hypocrite who doesn’t understand the meaning of intentional irony, you’re also in denial of your mental condition.
Seek help. Seriously.
I just had the following conversation on IM, and thought I would post some of it…
<Not me> About your OP…
<Me> yes?
<Not me> People aren’t objecting to the use of the adjective itself, but the percieved intent behind the use of the adjective.
It’s not so much about being PC at this point it’s that there have been umpteen multi-page brawls and still people refuse to understand what’s being said.
<Me> I agree to a certain extent. All I am saying is that there are people there who are being so sensitive that they are reading a lot and assigning intent where there is none, and as such, spew more hatred and as such are missing the entire point
<Me> my argument is that when people are so sensitive they assume that everything is intended as a personal slight against them, and then the flame away at that person spewing vile disgusting things, and it is wrong
<Not me> Well, for one thing, anything [F*cknugget - name edited] says should be disregarded because he’s loony. 
<Me> I agree totally
<Not me> I attribute that more to frustration than anything else. I mean we JUST had the RexDart trainwreck and not even a month later, someone’s doing it again.
<Me> my intent wasn’t to defend “fat bashers” or “fat lovers” or to defend hate speech of any kind. All I was trying to get at was that certain things are simply NOT hate speech, and to interpret it as such and then send it back in spades is terrible
<Not me> Aye, but to some extent you got caught in the crossfire. That and you did come across as a “defender” of sorts.
<Me> I know I did. But I was not sure how to phrase it…
<Not me> The way you just did, maybe? 
<Me> heh… good point…
- The gay bitch of a waiter who thought chatting with his friends was more important than waiting on me
- The black asshole at the bank who wouldn’t return my ATM card
- Go back home, you slimy Mex who cut me off in traffic!
- The Fat Moronic Bitch Who Bumped My Brand New Car
I made up the first three. The fourth is the title of the linked thread, of course.
What these all have in common is that they take the behavior of one member of a group - behavior unrelated to their membership in the group, I might add - and use it to trash the whole group by association.
It hardly matters what the group or the behavior is, under those circumstances. My reaction is the same any which way.
This is an excellent point. Calling someone “fat”, just as calling someone “gay”, can be inflammatory or it might not be dependent on the situation.
Yes, I cringed when I saw that OP and knew the fur was going to fly. I do think a lot of people on the SDMB are sensitive about their weight and that does cause a lot of anger to come out. However, there is a difference between describing something in such a way as to not make the anecdote bland, ie:
–and bringing up such a level of detail that makes it seem that this particular factor (race, sexual orientation, weight, etc.) is overemphasized, ie:
or
or
I think you get the idea. It doesn’t matter whose fault it is that the person has a certain characteristic (by their choice or not). If you say offensive things, don’t gasp in horror because people are offended.
I don’t think it’s a matter of being PC or not. It’s realizing that words can hurt, and hurting other people wantonly is wrong. This is a big board and if you’re smearing one label over everyone, or calling undue attention to one aspect of them that makes it seems as if you’re targeting a group rather than an individual, you can wager that there’s someone in that group here that isn’t going to like it. If you don’t care, fine, you’re free to speak, but don’t expect the rest of us to roll over and say nothing.
Oh shit - sorry about that. I read the whole thing wrong. You weren’t the one who started the original thread. I still think you’re wrong, though.
Mockingbird
No it isn’t you lying, ratfuck son of a crack addled bitch!
The irony I was referring to in my post was the irony of you giving the verbal smackdown of a lifetime to Keith Berry in the name of tolerance and looking like an intolerant asshole in the process. It is ironic, unintentionally ironic, that someone who acts like the self appointed guardian of the feelings of every member of every maligned group in the world can be such a rude and hurtful little whistle-dick in the process. Unless, of course, you intended to come across as such, in which case the irony is intentional and, well, mission accomplished.
Obviously you’re too lazy and stupid to address my post in full, instead focusing on one throwaway insult among many and pretending it’s a rebuttal. I wonder if anyone else fell for it?
Anyone?
In the first paragraph of the above quote, it is noted that a hypothetical moniker of “goat fucker” could not be proven or disproven.
Therefore, it follows that statements relative to weight/size are also not able to be substantiated from the third person, e.g. neither provable or non provable.
As such, unless you were witness to the alleged event, the OP causal to this new thread may or may not have issues of perception regarding size of his/her fellow citizens, the alleged MV accident, and views expressed regarding same.
Beyond that, even IF the OP in your opinion has views and perceptions that are evil, that is his/her right.
I may despise the position you take, the words you speak, and the platform you claim, but will give every measure of my person in defense of your right to so express yourself.
Jumping back to the first page, I thought I’d address this little piec of naiveity
Insults rarely have anything to do with a person’s “personal worth”. I find attitudes such as yours to be hopelessly naive and pollyanna. Let’s imagine a creative rant about a grocery store lines.
The “pimply faced highschool drop out who puts the cans on top of the bread”? That’s offensive. Acne is a medical condition and educational choice has little to do with bag-packing ability. The “wrinkled old troll who can’t understand the card machine”? Off limits. Age has nothing to do with self worth or intelligence. The grossly aromatic, Xena loving, socially stunted manager who is too put upon to lend the all powerful key"? Nope, neither personal hygiene, TV preference, nor charisma have anything to do with a person’s “worth”.
Are you beginning to see the point? Limiting insults to someone’s “personal worth” is not going to leave you much of a repertoire. Sure, we should be sensitive, but if you are offended if I call someone “ugly”, you need to grow a thicker skin ya’ scrawny four-eyed little bastard*
*Not meant as a derogatory remark to the following groups: medical conditions in which the epidermas is insufficient to fight infection, the underweight, the visually challenged, midgets, and those whose parentage is unceratain. I’m sure all members of all these groups have much worth as individuals. Additionally, I have no idea what iampunha looks like in real life.
I think the problem is not with bringing attention to hurtful words, but with the fact that there are quite a few people on this board who actively search through threads for something they can construe as un-PC, and then proceed to use extremely foul and disturbing language against their target. Often they have to twist the words of their target to great lengths in an attempt to justify their attack. It’s like they get great pleasure from attacking people, but in order to feed this desire guiltlessly they have to search for “villains.” It’s a good thing the real police aren’t just thugs who became cops for a chance to beat people up!
The ‘I am offended on behalf of _______’ Club. Lots of times the advice has been given to various posters that if you can tell by the title of the thread that you’re not going to like what’s in it, well, nobody’s forcing you to read it.
I tried, but after typing up two seperate posts and discarding them, I decided that I could not say it better than Revtim.
Nope, and nobody’s forcing anyone to post the OP, or to read my responses, or even play in this particular sandbox. So what?
This is a debate forum, just with somewhat looser rules than GD. People are going to respond critically to propositions they disagree with. Should they stay away, so everyone who agrees can jump in and have a big agree-fest?
If someone I care about is a member of a particular group, and it’s obvious from the thread title that the OP slams the entire membership of the group, there’s a good chance I’ll be there.
Nobody needs to force me to read or post, under those circs; I’ll jump in with cheerful abandon, thanks. And if they can’t stand the heat, they shouldn’t bitch that I should have stayed away from the thread because I knew I wouldn’t like it.