Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

College Student releases ****-list power-point

Options
1235

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    I'm not reinforcing your point, I am merely answering a question that you asked, you are interpreting my answer as a reinforcement of your point.Personally i don't think morals come into it, but that's just me.

    The very fact that you acknowledged that people have different morals and that distinction can be made, did reinforce my point though, whether intentional or not. The point was made that morals should be kept out of a discussion such as this, that's a meaningless position.


  • Options
    #123
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    prinz wrote: »
    It doesn't matter who she sent it to. The fact is she sent it to other people. After that what they do with it is irrelevant. The information came from her.

    And we go in circles from this point on I imagine. My first post answered this
    already ffs, by your moral logic it'd be a crime to tell a secret for fear
    someone might find out about it. The difference here? It's on paper as
    opposed to conversation between two people. Again you're applying your
    own standards to this situation, you feel it's wrong to tell secrets, okay,
    great. I don't. Doesn't change the fact that this secret between friends
    leaked and went public, by your logic she should be whipped or whatever
    for telling her friends secrets in the first place.


  • Options
    #124
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    prinz wrote: »
    The very fact that you acknowledged that people have different morals and that distinction can be made, did reinforce my point though, whether intentional or not. The point was made that morals should be kept out of a discussion such as this, that's a meaningless position.

    Of course they should be kept out of a discussion such as this. Did she do anything illegal?

    That's as simple as this is.


  • Options
    #125
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    ...I imagine the blokes in question turned around to at least one friend and indicated a sexual encounter with her, it just that they may have done so verbally instead of in text..

    ..and I'd find that equally distasteful. If that one friend told another and so on.....the origin of the info remains the bloke.


  • Options
    #126
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    Of course they should be kept out of a discussion such as this. Did she do anything illegal?That's as simple as this is.

    Logic fail.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Geansai Rua
    Registered Users Posts: 343 ✭✭Geansai Rua


    Wow..
    I thought this was a funny thread by the title.

    But this has got way too heavy!


  • Options
    #128
    Gummy Panda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,919 ✭✭✭✭Gummy Panda


    liah wrote:
    For me this is far more about freedom of speech than any SUBJECTIVE moral viewpoint such as sex.

    So people give up their right to privacy for the freedom of speech?


  • Options
    #129
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Gummy Panda wrote: »
    So people give up their right to privacy for the freedom of speech?

    Yes, that's the logical conclusion of the point she's making, just as suicide
    is a logical conclusion after sleeping with someone :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #130
    liah
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,750 ✭✭✭liah


    Gummy Panda wrote: »
    So people give up their right to privacy for the freedom of speech?

    That's my point. Where are the lines drawn? Is it at telling a secret to a friend? Or is it at spreading it to the public?

    Should it be illegal to share personal experiences involving others with friends? I agree it should be illegal to make that kind of information available to the entire world via the internet, but I severely disagree that it should be illegal to share experiences with your mates! Jesus, if that were the case we'd have very little to talk about!

    She related personal experiences to friends.
    She did NOT release it to the internet.

    Taking morals out of it (i.e., whether or not you personally believe sex should be discussed at that degree with friends, that's a subjective view, not an objective one). Imagine this were a discussion about a different kind of personal experience (say, something stupid done while drunk, like jumping off a roof) where do you want to draw the line? Seriously?

    EDIT: Just to make my point a little clearer, as far as we know she didn't lie about her experiences and told them truthfully. And as she was not the one to release the information to the public, there was clearly no intent behind what she wrote as she didn't intend for them to hear about it.

    It's not slander, it's not defamation, nothing. It's the exact same as telling your mates an embarrassing story about someone else. The idea that it's sex has little to do with it. I guarantee the guys turned to their mates and made comments about her and probably talked an awful lot about her since she did so many who knew each other, and I highly doubt you believe they should be punished via the legal system for it.

    Be reasonable, like.


  • Options
    #131
    Gummy Panda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,919 ✭✭✭✭Gummy Panda


    sponsoredwalk wrote: »
    Yes, that's the logical conclusion of the point she's making, just as suicide
    is a logical conclusion after sleeping with someone :rolleyes:

    And where did I make any reference to suicide?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Gummy Panda wrote: »
    And where did I make any reference to suicide?

    I didn't say you did, read the first post of this thread. Both statements are
    just way too OTT for reality.


  • Options
    #133
    Gunsfortoys
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭Gunsfortoys


    Since most women agree with her powerpoint presentation, I reckon us lads release a little presentation of our own, guaranteed about 2% of Irish women would qualify.


  • Options
    #134
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Could you maybe give examples of where women actually said they agree with it? Oh and I see it's ok for you to make derogatory comments about Irish women...
    ILA wrote: »
    What the **** is up with girls and these gross invasions of privacy and borderline defamation? And who the **** puts that type of thing in writing?
    With "girls"? Oh ffs, more of it...
    Gunsfortoys wrote: »
    I was responding to the "so what" responses by some women.
    What "so what?" responses before your post? Some people (not just women) rightly said the suicide remark by the OP was uncalled for.
    I reckon if the roles were reversed we would have a feminazi wave of condemnation. Ive seen you discard such male generalising of women on here for way less offensive items. So please, save me the "I dont know what your talking about" rabble.
    I really and truly don't know what the need for your feminazi comment was - perhaps to rile, but other than that...
    What does it take to constitute a feminazi 'round these parts anyway? I'd have thought it was a term for an angry man-hater who refuses to wear make-up, lingerie etc as it's bowing down to evil men, and who hates women who look pretty, and so on. It appears to be the case on Boards though that a woman who speaks out against unpleasant misogynistic comments is enough to constitute a feminazi.

    Grim.

    I really don't think she should have shared info on unenjoyable sexual experiences, and named names, with her friends though.


  • Options
    #135
    ILA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 542 ✭✭✭ILA


    Given some of the opinions on this thread, I'd now support the draconian Privacy Bill which was in the works. May write to Dermo to get it reactivated.


  • Options
    #136
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    prinz wrote: »
    Logic fail.

    Hardly, moral issues and issues of criminality have little to do with each other. One is the law of the land, the other is how you personally feel about things.


  • Options
    #137
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Dudess wrote: »
    What does it take to constitute a feminazi 'round these parts anyway? I'd have thought it was a term for an angry man-hater who refuses to wear make-up, lingerie etc as it's bowing down to evil men, and who hates women who look pretty, and so on.

    The things in red are the only things that could (should?) get a girl labelled as a
    feminazi, the rest sounds pretty hot (except for the refusal for lingerie!) :D


  • Options
    #138
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    Dudess wrote: »
    What does it take to constitute a feminazi 'round these parts anyway?

    Any woman who disagrees with a man.:P


  • Options
    #139
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    For some men here, it seems to be case all right Dragan. And of course when the woman does have the temerity to speak out against some horrible comment made about a woman, it automatically follows that she is: ugly, fat, butch, bitter, jealous (of whom? Hell it doesn't matter!), bla dee bla...


  • Options
    #140
    bluecatmorgana
    Registered Users Posts: 447 ✭✭bluecatmorgana


    WindSock wrote: »
    A girl basically makes a fk diary on Powerpoint, it leaked and because of it now she is a dirty skanky whore, responsible for male suicide rates?


    I agree its unfair and I reported title and first post, and would encourage others to do the same if they feel similarly.


  • Options
    #141
    btard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 391 ✭✭btard


    What's the big deal? It's just your normal slut diary. It what they talk about among themselves anyway. This one just happened to get out for some reason.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Creating a PowerPoint sexual partner rating system in the first place is a pretty bizarre thing to do - and seems to be symptomatic of deeper issues. Didn't think a rating system of anything would be created by anyone after the age of 14 (apart from when it's necessary).


  • Options
    #143
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    Dudess wrote: »
    For some men here, it seems to be case all right Dragan. And of course when the woman does have the temerity to speak out against some horrible comment made about a woman, it automatically follows that she is: ugly, fat, butch, bitter, jealous (of whom? Hell it doesn't matter!), bla dee bla...

    It's Logical Fallacy now, i've rebranded for late 2010, looking to get in touch with the youth market and max the evelope etc. You can still call me Dragan though.:cool:

    And sadly i wasn't even joking, feminazi is bandied around like hipster,culchie and proletariat...everyone has their own definition which they adhere to religious.

    Newsflash folks, words mean things, look em up or at least try and figure out what the common consensus is in the event of the word being modern vernacular as opposed to established English.


  • Options
    #144
    Gummy Panda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,919 ✭✭✭✭Gummy Panda


    Dudess wrote: »
    Creating a PowerPoint sexual partner rating system in the first place is a pretty bizarre thing to do - and seems to be symptomatic of deeper issues. Didn't think a rating system of anything would be created by anyone after the age of 14 (apart from when it's necessary).

    Maybe she was a big fan of mallrats


  • Options
    #145
    Micky Dolenz
    Registered Users Posts: 44,080 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    Thread title has been edited to better describe topic.


  • Options
    #146
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    Gummy Panda wrote: »
    Maybe she was a big fan of mallrats

    The whole thing does smack of an unimaginative fake alright, like that chick who quite her job via picture.

    HOPA indeed.


  • Options
    #147
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    It's Logical Fallacy now, i've rebranded for late 2010, looking to get in touch with the youth market and max the evelope etc.
    I understand: you forgot your old email address for changing your password after Boards was hacked... :pac:


  • Options
    #148
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    Dudess wrote: »
    I understand: you forgot your old email address for changing your password after Boards was hacked... :pac:

    Bingo.:D


  • Options
    #149
    Gunsfortoys
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭Gunsfortoys


    Dudess wrote: »
    For some men here, it seems to be case all right Dragan. And of course when the woman does have the temerity to speak out against some horrible comment made about a woman, it automatically follows that she is: ugly, fat, butch, bitter, jealous (of whom? Hell it doesn't matter!), bla dee bla...

    And women on here haven't done the same to a bloke? All I said was that IF it was a bloke that had these things released (by accident or not by accident) you would be saying "why do men have to demean the women like that rabble rabble rabble". Yet when a couple of girls do it then you think "sure why not".


  • Options
    #150
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Gunsfortoys wrote: »
    And women on here haven't done the same to a bloke? All I said was that IF it was a bloke that had these things released (by accident or not by accident) you would be saying "why do men have to demean the women like that rabble rabble rabble". Yet when a couple of girls do it then you think "sure why not".

    I've never read that here on boards yet, if you could point to some posts it'd be
    great to see this spectre in action! :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Gunsfortoys wrote: »
    And women on here haven't done the same to a bloke?
    Yeah they have, but far, far less (far less women on After Hours though, to be fair) - don't see how that makes it ok for there to be all that "feminazi" shyte though. There isn't even a male equivalent for the word "feminazi" too.
    All I said was that IF it was a bloke that had these things released (by accident or not by accident) you would be saying "why do men have to demean the women like that rabble rabble rabble". Yet when a couple of girls do it then you think "sure why not".
    I see very little, if any, "sure why not?" comments, and the ones I do see (and they're not as black and white as "sure why not?" in fairness) are being made by women AND men.
    Also, if you read my posts to this thread, you will see I have been critical of the girl and of people in general who belittle the sexual performance of named partners.


Advertisement