Besides, I’m a meat eater. I can indulge in a little extra luxury sometimes. Lets not get hypocritical about running down animals sometimes. Whatevers. It’s fun. There’s plenty to go around.
Anyone tried black rhino yet? I have. Whooo! I wouldn’t advise an SUV for that. Big mistake.
But really boytyperanma, what I really want to know is, how do you get those fucking beer stains off the center console!? Fuck, drives me absolutely bonkers. What’s up with that? How do people put up with this shit?!
This is not a reasonable position. You don’t have to put anything on the internet yourself to open yourself up to having your life destroyed by strangers for no good reason.
You can have a picture taken, give it to your friends, who then share it.
You can have a picture taken, and not give it to your friends, and a hacker can steal it and share it.
You might not assent to taking a picture at all. Someone else might take it and then use it to destroy your life on Twitter.
Basically what’s happening is that people are losing a right to have a private, personal life. And this is a huge fucking deal.
Something needs to be done to prevent internet witch hunts against people who are not breaking the law. Or even if they’re breaking small laws.
I don’t think people should be subject to the dangerous rage of the world for minor infractions, such as cutting someone off in traffic, parking in a handicapped space, or committing a fashion faux pas, or even minor evasions of tax law.
That’s not to mention doing things that are perfectly legal, but somehow enrage thousands of people on the internet, who are willing to ruin your life by getting you fired or doxxing you or worse.
So, I don’t like sport hunting. I think the woman in the picture is an asshole. But she has the right to do what she did and she has the right not to be shamed before the world. Gervais is totally in the wrong here.
Pedro, 3 posts in a row with the first two being responses to yourself. You have just announced yourself as a fucked up dude. Take a break to let people forget would be my helpful advice.
And helpful it is. Thank you internet friend. How long do you figure it takes until people forget? Don’t leave me hanging.
Hunting is an issue like guns, or weapons of mass destruction, or (insert whatever issue gets you riled up). Like how feral cats kill so many damn birds each year, and the people who actually let their house cats out at night (they don’t want them suffering by being trapped in the house) add to the carnage. There is no middle ground, which is why comedy eventually is the only option, since I can’t actually stop cats from killing millions of birds, or stop people from letting them roam the streets.
It’s also hard to stop people from hunting, just as it is to stop other people from eating dead animals. Or all kinds of things.
The OP has multiple pittings in it, but hunting is always going to be the thing people argue about the most.
Around here? Never.
Apparently some sad sack souls around here actually keep lists and make spreadsheets and shit. And no, I am not making this up.
You’ve been warned.
I believe you. My parents always warned me about not posting three times in a row, two of them to myself.
But no worries, I’m sure CarnalK is looking out for me.
I don’t know. Month or so? Good luck with that apparent mountain.
Seems reasonable to me. Gotcha buddy.
Quote edited for brevity.
Miller, I think you’re wrong. Posting about the science and emotional response doesn’t equal judgmental, dehumanizing, and/or condescending.
We’re talking about people with variations in emotion and affect. Do you dispute the science behind that? I never meant it as “they’re just broken by nature, poor things, and can’t help what they do” - that’s what you’re reading into it.
Maybe your negative reaction to my posts is a difference in how we see empathy as a trait. I was focusing on the genetic component that determines the emotional and physiological response:
As I said, not all people on the lower end of the spectrum are cruel, violent, or criminals, and empathy can be developed if necessary; if not as an emotional response (nature) then as developing cognitive empathy (nurture). But most people with low empathy don’t even need to or bother to do that, because they aren’t breaking any laws or having a problem functioning in society. Their not “broken” people, and I never said they were.
It’s just a different emotional make up from say, someone who can’t bear the thought of killing an animal, or is bothered by the thought of it even if they eat meat. It’s just a different emotional response, and it isn’t always rational - but of course we should try to temper our emotions with rational behavior. Yes, the propensity is there to be cruel on various levels (because they have more of a “stomach” for it, so to speak), but we can still control our actions towards others in spite of that propensity.
It’s the same as saying some people are heterosexual and some are homosexual and there is a spectrum of sexuality between the extremes of both. Is it judgmental if I say “I’m straight but am sometimes attracted to women” if there are other people who fall somewhere else on the spectrum, and can only relate to sex with one gender? How is that dehumanizing? How is that feeling superior to people who are only attracted to one gender?
I can’t relate to homophobes (and heterophobes!), even if they do not discriminate or harm anyone and just express it as an emotional response. I don’t relate to it, and tend to avoid relationships with them, but I don’t think they are inferior or broken for that emotional response. It’s how they are wired. And they do most likely have more of a propensity to discriminate against people they can’t relate to sexually, but it’s not an imperative that they do so.
The reason I brought it up at all was because of the simplistic logical fallacy of saying meat eaters were hypocrites so they couldn’t express an opinion about the subject. Do you really disagree that it’s a complex issue?
Yes, I disapprove of trophy hunters, and I am turned off by people who enjoy killing - and? Expressing a non-threatening opinion in a thread about that is being a prick? I guess anyone who posted in this thread is a prick too then, right? Or is it only the posters you disagree with?
You’re entitled to not like my posting style or my opinions, or whatever it is that rubs you the wrong way, but you’re not entitled to your own facts. Condescending is a subjective description of a posting style; if you like the person or agree with them you’re less likely to read their posts that way. I get that. But don’t call me dishonest (why would I lie about my opinion?) or mis-characterize what I posted. And since it’s the Pit you’re allowed to insult me for any reason, but in this case I think it’s a gross overreaction and distorted, and I reserve the right to respond. I’m not breaking any rules, so please don’t try to infer I should opt to not post an opinion you don’t like, especially since you’re a mod as well as a (contentious) poster.
For those playing the home game, camille is probably trying to paraphrase this:
Hey, Bucko, don’t look down from your high horse and chastise me because I let my sweet Tibbycat out every night. Tibbycat is no fowl murderer. Sure, he comes home most mornings with feathers on his fur and blood on his teeth. I can’t help it if he likes to orally pleasure menstruating birds…but, he is no killer!
What? I thought that was the main purpose of twitter, to put the smack down on everyone who isn’t as moral as I am?
Man, that is a tortured sentence right there. Speaking of torture, maybe the animal in the OP was better off going quickly, instead of the eventual fate of old animals in Africa. Which would be lions, dogs or hyenas, none of which is a pleasant way to die. And then be eaten. Like when they start gnawing on your liver while you are still alive.
We may take offense at people killing animals (OK some animals), but nature is the real killer. She never misses. Nobody ever gets out alive.
The whole damn system is set up so death is unavoidable. Is that fair? How come nobody ever pits mother nature?
There’s the real question right there.
Twitter? What the hell is that? Some kind of deviant bird sex?
Is it any wonder nobody is even talking about the real awful shit from the OP?
Like the death threats, from people angry over shooting an animal.
Seriously? People are upset over an animal being shot and eaten, so they threaten to kill somebody? That’s so fucked up.
Also this.
I know you are being cute, but it’s actually a good question.
Just what the hell is twitter actually? Like Facebook, it’s actually another goddamn web, existing even with out the internet. That’s right, twitter doesn’t need the internet to work. (don’t get fucking technical with me)
Twitter allows anyone, and I mean anyone, to text and send pictures to the whole goddamn world. In an instant.
Internet never had that power.
Don’t be so sure about that. I’ve got a plan…a good plan. Want in? Got Paypal?