Feedback requested "...bitch..."

Ponster

faceman wrote: »

Id say a fair percentage of users were only in nappies when Thatcher was around, and she was an awful bitch! [/irony]

When did you open that [irony] tag? Was it in a different post?

Should I consider everything you said so far today in other posts to be a joke?

faceman

Ponster wrote: »

When did you open that [irony] tag? Was it in a different post?

Should I consider everything you said so far today in other posts to be a joke?

No you would need to go back to June 2005.

There is difference between irony and a joke. [/serious]

Tigger

When did you open that [serious] tag? Was it in a different post?

Should I consider everything you said so far today in other posts to be serious?

also i'm glad that the op fixed feedback

i'd post a cat but overheal loves them

Ponster

I didn't know we had a [serious] tag !

faceman

Ponster wrote: »

I didn't know we had a [serious] tag !

Other lesser used tags you probably didnt know we had:

[troll]
[flirt]
[kinky]

You have bullied me into updating my post. Peer pressure works!

Marksie

Einstein wrote: »

I'm sure there's a big fancy word to describe all this but I dunno what it is...

Common sense

Ponster

All I can say to that is [invisible] [/invisible]

Overheal

Hagar wrote: »

Indeed I do, and as it's a private forum nobody who would be offended is a member.
To protect your sensibilities and in accordance with the forum charter I've just removed your access.

Can I have access? I think I've earned it.

Hagar

But you're an American and we have no laughter track, how will you spot the funnies?

Tigger

Overheal wrote: »

Can I have access? I think I've earned it.

tell us one 911 joke

tbh

Tigger wrote: »

tell us one 911 joke

a woman working in a 911 call center gets a phone call, but no-one's talking on the other end.

"hello Caller, Would you like the police?" she says. All of a sudden, she hears a child's voice whispering down the line. "It's ok" he says, "the police are here already. They are busy".

"Ok", says the lady, "do you need the fire brigade?"
"No" whispers the kid "They are here already. They are busy."

"Ok, so ambulance then?"
"no" whispers the kid, "there's a lot of doctors and soldiers here too, but they are all busy".

The woman asks "Why are they busy? What are they all doing?"


and the kid whispers


"looking for me".

Tigger

i ment overheal but thats cool

stand on your head

Overheal

American Airlines: now serving hot towels in coach. When does a Pentagon have 4 sides? When it intersects a plane.

Hagar

Go on then, but the jokes better be funnier than that.

randylonghorn

Hagar wrote: »

I am most concerned by the poll results. A huge majority claim that nothing offends them. That is scary. A whole generation with no concept of proprierty. I feel sorry for children growing up in this increasingly desensitised society.

Tbh, Hagar, while I wouldn't actually disagree with your underlying point, I think the poll results are seriously skewed by the options available.

I didn't vote, because I couldn't find an appropriate option ... my choices basically boiled down to:

"I'm offended by this."

or

"I'm not offended by anything."

For the reasons given above, I didn't find the post / title which started all this argument particularly offensive, but on the other hand there certainly are some things which I find offensive.

My choice, under those circumstances, was not to vote, but I suspect that many posters faced with the same dilemma may have chosen the "I'm not offended by anything" option in response to the issue which was the subject of this particular thread.

DeVore wrote: »

Those are the people who really do get "tarred and feathered" as a result of standing up for their rights. (I know, my family suffered in the north as a result of my fathers humanitarian activites.)

To compare a thread on a forum on the internet to being "tarred and feathered" when in fact there has been no action taken at all, is disrepectful to those people, mentioned in my list which unfortunately is not exhaustive. Its a side point but it really grinds my gears when people invoke such comparisons which does nothing but cheapen their sacrafice.

</offtopic>

DeV.

Fair enough. Without that elaboration, I read your original comment somewhat differently.

I think the phrase was used in a symbolic sense (and let's be honest, with a strong touch of hardly atypical American hyperbole!), but I do see where you're coming from.

Earthhorse wrote: »

Actually, there is very little ranting going on in this thread, except maybe by people who feel the OP has been strung up ...

I disagree in terms of the broad intent of what I was saying, though I am prepared to accept suggestions for a better choice of verb!

Earthhorse wrote: »

Is that what we want to spend our time doing? This isn't an education centre for the ignorant. We can exclude these elements from boards if we wish (well, if the admins and mods wish).

Being perfectly honest, it's NOT what I want to spend my time doing. I have quite enough seriousness in my everyday life and work, and I usually log into Boards for a little light-hearted R&R rather than to get embroiled in serious arguments (yes, I can see the irony of that statement in the current context!).

For that reason, following an initial period of regularly becoming embroiled in the more controversial threads in AH, in particular those which touched on issues of race and nationality, I deliberately drew back and chose, for the most part, not to open or read such threads ... though I still occasionally get sucked in, as indeed happened just this week.

My question, however, would be whether it is healthy for a society if mainstream websites such as this one choose to present an expurgated picture of that society, to ban / exclude all those who advance xenobhobic views (and in my experience that is a sizeable minority of people in our society to-day), to refuse to engage with that reality and to push such views and those who advocate them underground to fester in the dark?

I'm throwing the question out there, Earthhorse, I don't claim to have all or indeed any of the answers.

dr.bollocko

Can we haz locks now? Hugs all around. Good match folks. See you in the showers afterwards.

randylonghorn

dr.bollocko wrote: »

See you in the showers afterwards.

You'd like that, wouldn't you?! :P

Handsome Bob

randylonghorn wrote: »

You'd like that, wouldn't you?! :P

I know you would.:pac:

VH

Overheal knows what he did wrong. Now a ban is in order. No crime without punishment.

Kold

VH wrote: »

Overheal knows what he did wrong. Now a ban is in order. No crime without punishment.

What? There's plenty of crime without punishment.

randylonghorn

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I know you would.:pac:

Hush, you!

What happens on tour should stay on tour ... >_>

Earthhorse

randylonghorn wrote: »

I'm throwing the question out there, Earthhorse, I don't claim to have all or indeed any of the answers.

I'll take it from here so.

:cool:

metrovelvet

Tigger wrote: »

tell us one 911 joke

See Joan Rivers on the widows: "There have to be at least 6 who are happy."

metrovelvet

DeVore wrote: »

Those are the people who really do get "tarred and feathered" as a result of standing up for their rights. (I know, my family suffered in the north as a result of my fathers humanitarian activites.)

To compare a thread on a forum on the internet to being "tarred and feathered" when in fact there has been no action taken at all, is disrepectful to those people, mentioned in my list which unfortunately is not exhaustive. Its a side point but it really grinds my gears when people invoke such comparisons which does nothing but cheapen their sacrafice.

</offtopic>

DeV.

I think you are over-reading Overheals phrasing. I imagine that he is hyperbolising while also feeling that there is a surprising and overreaction that he may be feeling a little over exposed.

But .... it's another instance of the huge gaps between hiberno and american English, we speak at cross purposes a lot of the time.

tallaght01

So, no-one on particular was being called a biatch.
That doesn't mean it's right, but it reduces the impact a little bit.

I don't think overheal meant any offence in what he said, and I think that's important to bear in mind. The nastiest swear words should be much less offensive than the mildest, if the mildest was actually intended to offend.

Women and men have the right to be offended by whatever they want. But I guess they shouldn't expect the rest of us to be offended too.

The phrase doesn't really bother me. What bothers me more about the gender issue is that I'm sure you could ask 100 youngsters to list, say, the biggest causes of ill health on the planet. I reckon, if you're lucky, one or two of them might say gender inequality. It's one of the biggest causes.

But, at the end of the day, people will differ in their opinions. I regularly call my kid sister a dumb bitch when we're mucking about. She knows it's all banter, and we have a great relationship. I'll regularly call my mates dumb fukkas, or retards or much worse. I'm full of love for them :P But it's a case of knowing your audience.

So, I reckon it's not a huge deal. There are greater issues to deal with.

In fact, censorship in this context would probably lead to a bigger rift between those who would seek to see words like these consigned to history, and the rest of us.

Forcing solutions on people doesn't work. I'd much rather derogatory terms died out because people didn't want to use them anymore. Not because they aren't allowed use them?

What EXACTLY would we achieve by banning the term bitch?

metrovelvet

Sit yo nigga ass down and shut that nigga mouth of yows!

[Now imagine I find and article that says kissing white ass is good for a black man's health]

yeah....I was only joking.... ha ha very funny...

Now, imagine I post it on a board that is predominanantly white but with a not inconsiderable amount of african-americans on it.

Now, imagine what everyone would say.

Discalimer:first sentence is intended to make a point, not to mock or degrade or promote racial hate.

Insect Overlord

@Metrovelvet
Eh, the thread in question had nothing to do with racism. I get what you're trying to do (i.e. showing how a different form of bigotry might cause greater offence) but it could send this argument off on a tangent. The blatant display of racism addressed by your example bears no similarity to the alleged use of sexism in the AH thread title. There just isn't enough of a parallel there to merit your post.

tallaght01

I agree with an fhile.

But if you were to stretch the racist analogy. Me and some of my friends have thus weurd thing...when we see each otherm or speak on the fone, we often say "How's it goin, nigga?". We've done it for donkeys years. It's just irony and nothing more. It;s just a word, and I have nothing against black people whatsoever.

But I know there are people who'd find it offensive.

But I would find find someone saying for example "I hate African-Americans" much more offensive, purely for the intent behind it, even though they used the "Correct" non offensive words.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

y'all realise there are plenty of black people outside of america right?

Crash

Mordeth wrote: »

y'all realise there are plenty of black people outside of america right?

....say again?