Trolling goes much too far, we perfectly accurately categorised Scumpup’s posts as “macho-posturing” pages ago, didn’t we?
FTR, I would say that it is the action of a scoundrel to accuse others, who disagree with them, as doing so because they lack a sense of humour.
The obvious intended humour (and I thought at times he turned a phrase well enough) in some of Scumpup’s posts, in no way compensates for the embarrassingly small world-view that he clearly holds. nor disguises his sneering beligerence, off-colour references, and, snide attacks.
Uch. Y’all are making me quite ill here. Yeah, sure, pile on Scumpup because he bruised you with a funny. BTW: KellyM, no matter how obliquely you snipe with the word “troll,” you’re breaking the rules.
So bombast is dead? Are we all relegated to deadpan or exclamation, then illumination by just kidding or heh? Is that what you’re all so angry about?
For the love of God, gang, ease up on Scumpup, and ease up on the jangly-spurs bit. If you’d taken the time to engage him (as I did) you’d realize he was simply reacting to the tenor of this overly-whiny thread; when confronted, he did not strike back or beat his own chest. Why don’t you all just admit you didn’t get his posts? I was embarrassed to have engaged him without understanding there could be [sub]desiccated[/sub] humor there – as is evidenced by my hat-in-hand post above.
Scumpup, word to the wise: use a fuckin’ smiley or 12 next time. It’ll save you a raft of shit. <shrug>
Couldn’t agree with you more, Zenster. I’m just saying this Pit decorum crap is getting old.
At no one in particular: If you’ve got a problem with pimp-slapping, Pit the guy, don’t hijack this thread because you don’t like or get his jokes.
BTW: I cried in public just the other day. I had to lay off, among others, a 64-year-old man who had been with us for 14 years because the former president of my family’s company embezzled mucho casha and siphoned just about every viable contract into a side business.
Who’s winging, Zenster? I simply pointed out some facts from this very thread. You’ve had plenty to say about how horrible you think I am based on some satirical statements you weren’t clever enough to “get.” Yet it is you, not me, who was wishing violence on another member. The way I see it, you really are a sneering, unpleasant little man, and rather a hypocrite as well. Or are you falling back on the “but it’s cute when I do it!” defense?
I don’t think it’s acceptable for men to cry in public, nor do I think it should be. If you feel the need to have a good cry, it should be done in private.
If it comes upon you without you suspecting it, then try to remove yourself from the situation at hand to get to a private place. The nearest restroom, for example. Unexpected sobbing should be treated the same way as unexpected vomiting. Get thee to a toilet stall.
It is uncouth to break down crying at a restaurant without excusing yourself from the table. It is not a tremendous leap in logic to apply this to the foodcourt at the mall.
Actually, Zenster, I was satirizing the idea that it is wrong for men to cry. Your pride will not let you admit that you never got that, so you continue to cling to your fantasy that what I said was to be taken literally. I stand by my opinion of you personally.
It’s ok for anyone to cry in public if they are feeling intense emotion, for example: mourning. That is what DK’s friend was going through, greif, the death of a marriage. Of course he is going to be running on overdrive, and crying is cathartic, a much needed healthy release.
I hope those of you who advocated the “Shhh” stance, or even the “Not at all” stance never have to deal with the death of a way of life, or of a loved one. I don’t think you are emotionaly mature enough to be able to weather the storm, self heal, and grow from it. It takes a great deal of inner strength to own up to negative feelings, and deal with them, instead of “shelving” them and letting them fester inside of you.
It’s a “myth” that society has fed, that “Boys don’t cry!” and it’s BULLSHIT! Even in historical accounts, males are portrayed as “weeping” and they are not looked down upon. Somehow though, the “ideal” has been perpetuated, much to society’s detriment.
I think that if the pressure were not on males to keep their “softer” negative emotions inside, their non-aggressive ones, that society would run much smoother, and stress levels would be much lower. Somehow, it’s ok for a male to be “pissed” and puff up, and make threat displays, but it’s not ok for them to show sadness.
Those of you who want a “real man” who doesn’t cry should ask themselves this. If you want a male who doesn’t cry, wouldn’t a gorilla, chimpanzee, or orangutan do just as well? (Although I think even they show sadness in “public”…)
Females kick ass and take names too ya know. And we cry as well. Joan of Arc, Japanese Samarui who were female, and Annie Oakley to name a few.
So, what’s your point? That because males are judged by a different “standard”, they cannot show sadness and loss openly unless they are “alpha”? Your logic is flawed.
Look at what that means, those who are “alpha” males can be emotionally healthy and further the healing process, thus enabling themselves to grow and move on, but those who are not “alpha” cannot do this because they can’t “kick ass” and defend that right?
That’s a societal structure that is unstable to say the least… It would leave all the little guys resentful and seething, until they “boil over” and take it out on someone lower in the “pecking order” than themselves. Guess to some extent it’s true though. To societie’s detriment. mutter Deluded people furthering myths and tearing down society… grumble
