So people who oppose the war are hypocrites if they take a little time out to relax in a jacuzzi?
Lotsa warped logic in this thread.
But certainly, if we want to be correct when we curse, we should not hold one organ over another, no? Of course, the idea that one literally has genitalia in mind when using these words might seem non-sensical, but one should never underestimate the power of words when wielded in the manner of an axe to grind.
Furthermore, since any manner of anal or oral sex (since it necessarily stems from homophobia), correctness would dictate that we do away with all references to sex (lest we fall into the trap of heterophobia). People shall not be called fuckers of any stripe. Clearly, when someone calls another person a fucker, they expressly mean to link them with the exceptionally unpleasant act of having intercourse. We all know just how terrible that is! Why, it’s nearly as bad as receiving oral sex.
I would like to request that you generate a list of acceptable curse words that we can use. Keep in mind that they must survive the literalist litmus test - any use of a profanity or curse is necessarily meant in a literal way, thus expressing not only one’s displeasure with the target of the oath, but also any potential person or group associated in any way with that oath.
I think “jerk” is probably all that we have available to us, since the soda jerk lobby has gone the way of the dodo. Of course, it may be that it is a bastardization of “jerry”, and thus disparages Germans, so we would do well to steer clear of that one too. And I apologize for saying bastardization, because clearly I meant that altering the word jerry to jerk would be as bad as being a fatherless child.
In the next edition of the Illustrated Dictionary of Rock and Roll, the entry on the Steely Dan classic, ‘Pretzel Logic’ there will contain a line drawing of Little Ryan.
Oh, you can use any curse word you like. I’m not (and I doubt Excalibre is) suggesting that anyone be censored. I just think that it would be smart to stop and think whether use of such a word reflects more poorly on the person who is using it than it does the person they are attempting to insult.
[QUOTE=Ryan_Liam]
Perhaps you wouldn’t have such a taxing work week in Iraq. But conditions might not be very nice.
I believe the government still offers some sort of educational benefit to vets–although it’s considerably less than the GI bill. Inform your brother!
Sounds like you are telling me to think about which groups I might offend before using one profanity over another. I get the impression from Excalibre’s post above that profanities associated with girl parts are bad, whereas profanities associated with boy parts are okay. Previously he has taken me to task for profanities that involve oral sex. If there is a cadre of finger-waggers who are going to jump up every time they perceive third-party disparagement when someone lets loose with a profanity, we ought to be able to come up with a list of which ones are okay and which ones aren’t. I suspect in actually doing so it would quickly become apparent that it is an exceptionally non-sensical practice.
My point is that it is completely irrational to assume a literal interpretation about profanities, and to then seek out offense when they are used. (For example, how often would you see this thread written as “Redfury and Der Trilhs: Vaginas”? Essentially never, because he wasn’t talking about vaginas. Get over yourself!)
It is even further down the road of lunacy (a disparagement of the mentally ill, by the way) to start parsing out relative amounts of offense that can be taken by a bystander witness to such a severe insulting.
Nitpick: a bastard isn’t a fatherless child. A bastard is a child born out of wedlock.
Well, I need a word that would mean “fatherless child” because that is the literal meaning I wanted to apply to the hypothetical modification of “jerry” to “jerk.”
First of all, you missed the point of Excalibre’s and my posts, if you think the objection was simply that it was a girl part instead of a boy part. Secondly, when I said it would be smart to think about how usage of certain words reflects on the user, I was looking at it more from the stance of being unnecessarily vulgar, rather than the literal meaning of the word. I don’t know what oral sex reference Excalibre objected to, or why he objected to it, but I think there is a very good chance that I would similarly have a lowered respect for someone who used it. This kind of thing is sort of junior-high level discourse, and not very expressive.
Now I’m a lunatic because I don’t have a lot of respect for people who use vulgar language for no good reason. :rolleyes: My point was that if you want to Pit someone and really give people sympathy for your point of view, it would not be a bad idea to try to rise above the level of the person you are pitting.
“anakin” ?
Pssst! Ryan, your help is badly needed in Baghdad:
Best get on the next flight over and set them straight as to why “your” strategy ain’t working…
BTW, bothers me none being called a “cunt.” Mattter of fact you should rename this thread to: “Cunt In Jacuzzi”
Bet you’d get a lot more hits that way…
What the hell is wrong with you? Did you snack on paint chips as a baby? Or were you just born retarded? Do you need a helper to wipe the drool off your chin?
You can make up whatever fantasy world you like in which words mean whatever you decide they do. I merely pointed out that the word “cunt” is not comparable to the word “dick” because it simply has a stronger meaning in our society. That’s precisely the opposite of claiming the word can only be used in its literal sense. Words mean what they are used to mean; that is the rationalist position. You clearly have a problem with rational discussion of language (though I shouldn’t be so narrow; history has shown that rational discussion of anything is offensive to your delicate sensibilities). Well, too bad. I’m still going to comment on language usage from a rationalist, empirical perspective.
If I were attempting to claim that the words “dick” and “cunt” were being used literally, then it would mean that calling someone a “dick” or a “cunt” would mean nonsensically claiming they were a reproductive organ instead of a human being. If you try really, really hard, you might understand why that’s logically untenable, and thus that I would be unlikely to claim that people were using those words literally. In fact, acknowledging that two words that are analogous are still not equal or equivalent means directly recognizing that they can’t be interpreted or compared on a strictly literal basis. Your sad attempt to take me to task was predicated on my saying exactly the opposite of what I actually said.
If you’re going to snipe at me like this, try to at very least figure out what the topic of conversation is. Oh, and I never even came close to suggesting that anyone be censored, so that’s a strawman as well. If the very fact of my speaking offends you so much that you have to invent phony reasons to disagree, then maybe you should consider using your ignore list. It will save you further embarrassments of this sort.
Thank you, I appreciate this. But I have to note that his confusion extends far beyond simply pretending that I’ve called for censorship. This is Hentor, as usual, babbling nonsensically at me because he likes to snipe but, no matter how much he furrows his brow, he just can’t understand what the rest of us are talking about.
What I want to know is, are they terrible cunts?
This is not a fair characterization of any post I have ever read on the SDMB. I was anti-war before there was a war, and I haven’t changed that stance, but I also recognize the difference between “regrettable civilian casualties” and butchery. We’ve seen butchery in Haditha and a few other similar incidents. I’ve never seen anything like “cheering” when the news of these incidents hits the SDMB. Carnage, as opposed to butchery, we’ve had plenty of, I consider the majority of this an offshoot of the technological advances in warfare(depleted Uranium and white phosphorous make me very mad) but butchery is a different matter. The difference between carnage and butchery is intent. Carnage is “shock and awe” style overkill or collateral casualties and is implicit in every war, regardless of how justfied or unjustified. Butchery is inexcusable and should be decried universally. Haditha was an act of butchery, as was the beheading of Nick Berg.
Find me posts “cheering on” what was done in Haditha, or similar circumstances, because I haven’t seen them.
Enjoy,
Steven
Retarded? Yikes - how can you participate in a finger-wagging about using derogatory and offensive insults and simultaneously fling such a word about?
I was referring to this gem from a couple of months ago, when you were trying to tell me that my calling someone a cocksucker meant that I was also a homophobe:
Otherwise, you had a nice little spittle-flecked rant going there. Good work - suggest that I’m stupid and can’t understand what you are talking about. Nice argument! You big…mean…poopy-head! (Hope I didn’t offend the coprophiliacs!)
Gee, so I chimed in to confirm someone else’s substantive and accurate description of the difference between “cunt” and “dick”, and that means I’m “finger-wagging”?
The point, then, being that you consider any attempt to discuss the particular implications of a word to be “finger-wagging”. Under your bizarre attempt at logic, then, this issue is verboten. In your weird little world, talking in an abstract sense about what a word means and how it’s used constitutes “finger-wagging”.
No, that could have just meant that you hadn’t thought about the issue. The fact that you evaded the issue with nonsense instead of honestly considering it is what indicates to me that you’re probably a homophobe.
Let’s see: I proved already in my last post that you were lambasting me for saying something completely different from what I actually said. You have no response to that. Even you, then, can’t make an argument for why what you said could possibly have been relevant to the discussion or based upon what I actually said.
Yeah, I think “retarded” is a pretty accurate description of you. Jesus, your inability to respond is a de facto admission that I’m right. You might as well try to salvage some shred of dignity by acknowledging that fact.
Hard to do when the hamsters won’t oblige, but here’s a couple for now:
On the use of White phosphorus in Fallujah:
bolding mine.
Right. As if those were the only (or even the majority) of people killed in thet particular massacre.
Might as well read the whole thread. Plenty of justifications offered for the razing of Fallujah – including not allowing any men (up to fifty or so) to leave the town before it was levelled.
Here’s another doozy:
As I said, the hamsters are not playing nice, but should you want more, I’ll try again later on.
Hentor, why waste your time with the self-proclaimed judge of all that’s Right or Wrong with the SDMB – including the characterization of many of its members into ‘I like and I dislike’ as in: “X” is almost as unbiased and reasonable as myself while “Y”…well, there’s not enough distance from here to Patagonia that I’d like to put between us.
Really, who gives a flying fuck what the self-righteous dickwad – and incorrigible gossipmonger/busybody – thinks anyway?
Ooh . . . somebody’s sad that I compared him to duffer and Ryan_Liam, is he? Aww, would you like me to buy you an ice cream cone?
Hey, join the crowd. Pit me if you like; the last one was fun. Because it confirmed something I’ve long suspected - the dummies and the wackos around here don’t tend to like me much. Sometimes I’m mean to them. Sometimes I’m impatient with them. Sometimes, I hurt their feelings. Like I always say - I don’t consider it a virtue to suffer fools gladly.
So if a couple of the most partisan lefties on the board have a bug up their ass about me, well, I’m comfortable with that. I take a bit of pride in knowing that I’m just as intolerable to crazies who share my politics as to crazies who don’t.
Gotta say I have never pitted (at least dont remember) another SDMB’er, but my God, RedFury and DerT are two of the bigges assholes I have seen post in quiet some time. DerT is not new of course, I actually knew he was a jerk already. First I seen of RedFury showing his “colors”.
I just dont get how support of troops in Iraq = cheering the death of iraqis’. So lets say I supported the US’s role in WWII, did that mean that I cheered the death of the japanese, or german civilians? Or because WWII was a “just” war, those innocent cilivians deserved to be killed? Or if not deserved, could be glossed over?
I think GWB is an idiot, and I hate that our troops are over there and I will vote for every politician i see who will get us out. But until that great day, I will support the troops and their efforts.
Im with ya Ryan… fuck em both.