Well, for me, a personal attack is when someone who actually knows somethng about me attacks me. . . PERSONALLY!
I don’t care much for the Republican Party. Saying so is not a personal attack on Republicans, especially not my sweet Gramma.
I actively root against the MN Vikings. Saying so is not a personal attack on Vikings fans.
I don’t believe in the Christian notion of God, nor the Jewish nor the Muslim, nor Hindu nor Zoroastrian. To say that I don not believe in your belief system is not a personal attack.
I’m a Dionysian. To be anything else denies Dionyias. You know what? I don’t think tha you’ve attacked me personally just because you’re a Christian or Jewish or an animist.
Since this is the Pit (would that be STITP?), I’ll give an example of a personal attack.
“I hate you as a person. You, personally, are offensive to me. I dislike having your odious odors near, and consider your presence on earth to be a good reason to hope for the apocalyypse.”
“Bucky” - I hate that name! It really similar to Buck which is a kind of knife often used to kill small animals like kitty cats. What kind of monster would tap into that kind of depravity!
You also have the annoying habit of turning just about every sentence into its own paragraph. My prison psychologist says that’s a major indication of homosexuality and quite possibly a precursor of anti-social behavior.
I might disagree with your politics or choice of teams for example, but if we keep the discussion to the issues of those differences, that’s not a personal attack.
That’s just discourse and discussion.
If, however, we disagree and I show my disagreement by commenting on your weight, heritage, socioeconomic background or the fact that you’re not man enough to tote Capt America’s shield–that’s a personal attack.
What the fuck are YOU talking about Mjollnir? Bucky, Eve and I are having a damn private arguement here. We don’t need to be annoyed by some Guber programmer with an adolescent fascination for the God of Thunder and fifties comic book heroes.
But it’s rarely that clear cut. Oh, okay already, in the Pit it’s sometimes that clear cut with scatology, aspersions on ancestry and sexual practices with farm animals.
But the line between the issue and the advocate can blur pretty damned fast. It doesn’t have to say, “you’re a moron”. It can just creeep over the line with blanket statements and sweeping generalizations; “anyone so deficient in brain/moral standing/whatever is a ____.”
And if that category happens to include you, well…
Besides, it’s damned hard to separate beliefs from the people who hold them. Helluva definition, not? What better? By possessions? Civic memberships? Sex? Race? Most folks have a pretty clear interior view of themselves based on beliefs of some kind.
I’m not trashing your point, Bucky, just trying to find where lines can be drawn–if lines are possible.
I seldom believe in “the line” that needs to be drawn.
The differences seem pretty clear to me. If you don’t agree with my faith/opinion/etc. but refrain from insulting me, it’s not a personal attack.
Christians who deny that they stole their religion from Dionysias and don’t believe in him are still not making a personal attack.
Christians who say to my face, “I can’t see why you would believe in Dionysianism. It seems wrong/silly/evil” are STILL not making a personal attack!
Satan’s #2 statement and Sake’s posts show PERSONAL attacks.
Most of the so-called personal attacks on this board consist of whining.