Per the quotes in my previous post: : she needs no help. She gets up there whether or not anyone responds to her. She is the most tedious person on the board.
Regarding Beck, I think there’s a few things to keep in mind here. Because of whatever background reasons there may be, this person in rural Arkansas is culturally incongruent with many of the mainstream views on this board. OTOH, I think she’s established herself as a good person by one of the most fundamental definitions – the way she cares for animals, both domestic and wild – animals that can do nothing for her except make her feel better because she’s making their lives better in some small way. All while enduring the hardships of her own health problems. I don’t think this is some idiosyncrasy – I’m sure she treats other people the same way. She’s also brightened the board, IMHO, with her tales of her own bizarre adventures out there in the wilds.
All I’m saying here is this. Remember how a person’s moral character is judged by how they treat those who can do nothing for them. Relentless pile-ons on a poster with a weak ability to defend themselves may be a poor reflection on the moral character of the attackers.
I just don’t want interesting threads ruined
Then why are all your examples her responses to other posters specifically engaging with her, and half of YOUR posts in this thread are specifically targeted to aggravate her?
Some itches are very hard to not scratch.
Beck is a dumb hick that isn’t capable of defending what she says?
That sum it up?
And what you need to realize is that she came to this thread and attacked everyone. She’s defending herself just fine. She’s not getting piled on, but getting back the hate she pushes out.
Moral character has no relevance on either side of this, and trying to paint her as the victim when she deliberately starts this sort of thing and deliberately antagonizes back to keep it going makes no sense.
She’s a good person. She also is sometimes a condescending jerk in pit threads.
She’s not being treated differently than anyone else who would say the same things. I know: I was that condescending jerk many times.
Being nice to wild animals and nasty to humans you want to interact with is not evidence of moral character. It’s evidence of lack of self-control. In her specific case an overweening sense of persecution.
What a crock of shit.
I mean, that Alsatian seems pretty happy…
There is an equally compelling* agument to the “people who are nice to animals” which is “people who cannot relate to people can still manage to relate to animals”.
I think Adolf fits the second category.
* one I just came up with
I don’t want to go too far down this rabbit hole, but that’s a ridiculous and utterly cynical counterpoint. Lots of evil sociopaths and psychopaths have had pets, presumably valued for their unswerving loyalty to the narcissistic psychopath. What I’m talking about as an important marker of character is unconditional empathy for all living things.
I choose not to presume. Evil people can love other people, too, even non-transactionally. Same for animals. And plenty of people are just evil without having those pathologies (quite a few psychologists would disagree with diagnosing Hitler that way, for one)
Just because a person has sentimentality (I would not call it empathy) for animals doesn’t mean they necessarily have empathy for humans. There have been people on this very board who would sooner save a drowning dog than a random human being, for instance.
Then don’t. You decided to make a fucking ridiculous argument in defense of a bigoted asshole. Don’t double down on it.
Eh, Beck is neither a hero nor a villain. She clearly loves some humans, and some animals. She also clearly has disdain for other humans, and other animals. (I mean, did you read her stories about the family of wild hogs?) I disagree with her on a lot of topics, but I’m not going to go comparing her to Hitler. Nor am i going to hold her up as a Paragon of virtue because she’s nice to some animals.
Getting back to the topic of the thread… Yeah, Jasmine has some opinions that are pretty over-the-top.
Leaving aside the whole “saying how she treats animals, while showing us how she treats human beings” stuff, I just can not give her a buy on her constant misunderstanding of arguments, or her continuing supposed confusion on the differences between the different forums, especially considering the number of times she has been told about both. I can only assume one of two things: She is either doing this deliberately, or she is too confused to be here.
we’d be getting rid of a lot of posters if that was the standard
And you admirably cared about what others said, took it to heart and changed the way you posted. Others have done the same thing too or eventually left.
No. Maybe two or three.
The standard? Being here more than long enough to know the difference between the rules of the different forums, repeatedly being told the differences, and not caring enough to understand those differences.
This is thoroughly disingenuous. No one compared her to Hitler. Mr Dibble was pointing out the absurd of wolfpup’s argument.