It wasn’t a violent and contentious relationship, it was an abusive one. All that kind of phraseology serves to muddy the waters and imply mutuality. It’s not “complex.” There aren’t things we don’t understand. It’s one person abusing another person. I The attempts to insinuate mutality are offensive. It is not controlling or censuring to point that out.
If you don’t care, you don’t care, but don’t try to turn it around to imply that the people you’re offending – people for whom domestic violence is not some hyothetical musing – are being “controlling” because they don’t appreciate hearing the same, tired, hackneyed victim-blaming bullshit yet again.
A friendly discussion about an out of control guy beating up and threatening his baby mama… ooh-kayy.
Dio is advising me on tact… maybe now Bricker can come along and talk about the importance of always going along with the flow in political discussions or perhaps jayjay can give me some advice on how to pick up chicks.
astro said this is “an informal discussion about a celebrity breakup and the messy details surrounding that situation including violent and abusive behavior.” Is informal so far from friendly?
I don’t know about the drug use but he was HIV positive. He also falsely accused a guy of sexual assault a few months before he was murdered; by all accounts he was a spoiled obnoxious neurotic little prick. And this in no way makes him deserving of murder. If I were introducing his mother I’d probably go heavy on the martyr and less on the little prick part, but in an informal discussion I truly don’t understand why it’s some sort of sin to discuss them all.
If there is unfriendliness, show me where I started it. Did I make any accusations against anybody present? I don’t think so- yet my name was brought into the discussion, so… Speak, Caesar is turned to hear.
Just tactless, insensitive, and ameliorating of abuse- among other things.
And speaking of Shepherd, getting into the truck with two drunks he didn’t know was unpardonably stupid. Is this the same as saying he deserved killing?
Maybe not, but you’re the one flinging insults after there have been several warnings already issued in this thread. In fact, you’re flinging insults at people who aren’t even POSTING in this thread. Nice.
I somehow doubt that Bricker will be insulted by the notion he’s opinionated and prone to speak his mind in an argument regardless if he’s in the minority or that JayJay would be hurt to learn I don’t think he’s the best one to give advice on how to pick up chicks (unless you happen to think being gay is an insult- obviously I personally don’t nor do I consider it an insult to imply that- in spite of what bad sitcoms teach- gay guys aren’t the best to ask about picking up women). Those aren’t insults, they’re absurdities using well known Dopers to demonstrate the absurdity of Diogenes giving advice on tact, though should Bricker or JayJay take offense I’ll most certainly apologize.
Spin, spin, spin if you like. You are being insulting to Dio’s character by making “absurities” designed to denigrate. I don’t know a thing about the other posters you mention, only that by the way you did it you intended it to be an insult. An insult flung after several warnings in this thread. Yet here you are giving the “I didn’t start it!!!” defense.
And absurdities. If you’re going to quote me in “quotes” no less, note spelling. (Better yet try this: highlight the world and either right click:copy or CTRL+C then right click:paste or CTRL+V- you won’t even have to worry about spelling.)
So, astro explains multiple times that his and your stance is perfectly appropriate for an “informal” discussion on the topic. Informal=friendly, more or less. Dio basically says “well for a friendly discussion you’re still be insensitive” and you respond with shock? disgust? skepticism? that a “friendly” discussion is even possible when talking about a crazy person like Mel Gibson. Even though earlier tonight you quoted astro and seemed to be in complete agreement with him. You then insulted Dio even though he’s done nothing wrong in this thread (and God forbid we just let Dio’s posts speak for themselves here especially when you could score some cheap points by dragging in other baggage) and then informed Rilchiam that you’re not the one being unfriendly? Did you not glean her actual meaning? Did you not understand astro’s point when you agreed enthusiastically with his post? Did you get so caught up in proving you’re not the “unfriendly” one that you forgot you scoffed at Dio’s characterization of this as a “friendly” conversation, or do you only agree with that when astro says it?
And it’s hard to read tone so I will say I’m not trying to be snarky. I’m asking these questions to make sense of this exchange because it feels like somebody is suffering a disconnect. It might be me.
Sampiro, your comparisons are just a little unflattering to Diogenes the Cynic. And Bricker and jayjay may not appreciate the references either. Please tone it down. This thread is already getting out of hand.
Sleeps With Butterflies, if you see something the mods may take issue with, report the post but don’t get involved in the situation yourself. I appreciate the thought but it’s not helpful. (For the record there have not been any formal warnings given so far in this thread.)
? When did he falsely accuse anyone of sexual assault? He told his mother he was raped in Morroco on a trip but I can’t find anything on Google about a false charge.
Your assertion that, effectively, anything beyond “He beat her, he’s a violent abuser, that’s it.” is unworthy of being deliberated or discussed, is rude and abusive to DV victims participating in the thread, and implies that she kinda, sorta, maybe might have been asking for it, is the very essence of being controlling and censuring.
Lives and relationships are complex and motivations can be discussed by intelligent people without losing track of who is the bad guy is. Insisting that everyone use only your eight Crayola colors in diagramming their conversations and opinions, because otherwise someone is going to be hurt is controlling in the extreme.
Nice try, but no. This is complete horseshit. It doesn’t even parse logically to me. I have no idea what kind of point you even THINK you’re trying to make. It’s not complex. There is nothing more that needs to be understood or discussed once we get to physical abuse and death threats.
Sampiro, is something wrong? Besides this? I know you can throw down with the best of them, but it’s not like you to reframe arguments and taunt people and seemingly argue for the sake of arguing. Perhaps you should stop posting for a bit.
Your notion that a general group discussion about the evolution and context of a situation between two people involving violent and abusive behavior is, or should be, effectively over once violence is perpetrated on one of the parties is about the strangest assertion I’ve ever seen. You keep trying to treat a general discussion thread like your own personal Rhetoric 101 class. It’s not.
If participants are inclined to discuss any number of elements that contributed to that circumstance it’s unfortunate that this grieves you, but that’s your problem and your decision.
So um, I know you all like to beat your heads in against brick walls, but if I may interrupt for a second I need to ask something important: I’m about to go to sleep, when am I getting my blowjob?
