Publicly unacceptable opinions

FishOnABike · 02-08-2018 09:36AM

keffiyeh wrote: »

Alarming.

For your first point, it's acceptable I suppose if you want Ireland to leave the EU, and lose all the benefits that brings. Would that be ok with you?

Secondly, can you clarify why Ireland should not need to shelter fugees? Do you think the Irish should have been turned away from America?

I wouldn't be a fan but to be honest their music isn't that bad.

Undividual · 02-08-2018 09:43AM

Mackmatic wrote: »

This just screams "someone please validate my sh!tty opinions".

So frustrating to see a comment like this.

The natural state of human knowledge is ignorance. How do people expect others to learn or change their sh*tty opinions if they cannot be discussed?

Undividual · 02-08-2018 09:47AM

oneilla wrote: »

OP doesn't like Muslims, travellers and women. You can find online spaces where these awful views are "accepted" and, you might even find a group of friends who share them. Perhaps you could voice support for a certain US president....

Silly points, to be fair. I never said I didn't like any of the above. I just want everyone to be held to the same standards, as I thought I outlined.

Undividual · 02-08-2018 09:50AM

Shenshen wrote: »

My really unacceptable opinion is that everybody should be given the benefit of doubt.

OVER MY DEAD BODY!

Undividual · 02-08-2018 10:01AM

Deleted User wrote: »

The first page of this thread is exactly why polling is so unreliable. People don't even tell the truth on their phones lest their family or housemates hear them say one thing and then blow it up into something else. We have people calling OP's opinions shltty and others saying he "doesn't like Muslims, travellers and women." There are definitely people here who think he's a Nazi.

You're allowed to have qualms with things without it turning into dislike or hate. Stop seeing the world and especially people's opinions in black and white.

In order, natural migration flows work, mass immigration from anywhere or by any group of people doesn't.
Travellers don't integrate well into society.

Do a lot of women have boxes for potential mates to tick? Yes.
Are these boxes as relevant now as they were even 20 years ago? No.
Those are the unrealistic expectations that shouldn't exist in a society with both parents working.

Women are more likely to be bisexual than men. The trope of the "man-hating lesbians" are just the bisexual women who've had an awful experience with men. My girlfriend and most of her friends find women attractive, and even sexually appealing. Most have fooled around with another girl at some point. This is absolutely not as common in men.

Do I dislike Muslim people, travellers, or women? No, I certainly don't. But I am Hitler.

From one Hitler to another, I'm glad to read the above and feel like my post was actually read as intended, thank you.

To be clear, I also do not dislike Muslim people, travellers, or women.

Pac1Man · 02-08-2018 10:17AM

There is an incredible amount of dim people here. Unable to see the wood for the trees.

Undividual · 02-08-2018 10:43AM

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

Try_harder wrote: »

Its playing the victim card! People think Im racist/sexist etc

This is the standard right wing practice now. Faux rebellion. I'm not allowed to say this, says the Daily Mail columnist. I'm not allowed to say this, says Jordan Peterson to an audience of thousands. I'm not allowed to say this, says Paul Joseph Watson on his highly popular youtube videos. I'm not allowed say this, says Trump from the Oval Office.

I understand what you're saying but I think the question this begs is why are so many people listening to these individuals? I broadly believe their advocacy for free speech and willingness to offend others (though I don't know PJW's content too much) is what makes them so attractive to the public. People have been stifled for so long due to the constricting force of political correctness that there is a rising sentiment for plain speaking people.

TomSweeney · 02-08-2018 10:45AM

DONTMATTER wrote: »

On boards.ie, I've found that thinking that women deserve equal rights is an unacceptable position. Disliking racists is an unacceptable position. Stating that Dublin have been given far more money than everybody else in Gaelic Games is an unacceptable position. Overall though it's just a bit of craic. A silly internet forum that we can talk **** in.

So disingenous ...

Undividual · 02-08-2018 10:53AM

mikemac2 wrote: »

The stereotype of Jewish people being money hungry is accurate in my experience

To preface, I have only met one person in my life that I know is Jewish and I know very little about him.

I am incredibly bored of seeing Hollywood movies about Jewish people. Like transgender and gay people, they are over-represented in American movies and TV shows in my opinion, and often as victims, or at the very least not as villains. Inglourious Basterds is probably the best example of this.

Having read Man's Search for Meaning, I would be more interested in seeing movies/shows about those Jews in concentration camps who worked for the Nazis. I would find that kind of scumbag survival instinct more intriguing tbh.

Mike Hoch · 02-08-2018 11:07AM

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

This is the standard right wing practice now. Faux rebellion. I'm not allowed to say this, says the Daily Mail columnist. I'm not allowed to say this, says Jordan Peterson to an audience of thousands. I'm not allowed to say this, says Paul Joseph Watson on his highly popular youtube videos. I'm not allowed say this, says Trump from the Oval Office.

That's some pretty awful examples.

There is a campaign to boycott advertisers who pay for ad space with the Daily Mail, in an effort to shut down the aforementioned columnists, to deprive them of employment with a media outlet that agrees to broadcast their views.

The likes of Watson live under an impending permanent ban from the various social media sites. Of course, it's their perogative what they want on their networks, but to say he has an unrestricted right to free speech is pushing it.

I don't understand the hype about Peterson at all, I got bored after 12 minutes of listening to him, but there were the usual muppets protesting and handing out flyers at his point depot gig recently.

Take the case with Katie Ascough. She was forced out of her position because she was unwilling to break the law. Granted, the law handily correlated with her own personal beliefs, but the bottom line is she was forced out because of both who her parents are and that she wouldn't pull Mandela and break laws she agreed with on behalf of those who didn't. Contrast that with Ibrahim Halawa- he's also the offspring of a prominent religious conservative. You won't find anyone from the crowd who kicked Ascough out asking Halawa where he stood on the two recent referendums (even former golden cow John Connors copped the ire of the right on brigade for his abortion stance.)

I couldn't care less what anyone's views are. I think that within reason anyone should talk about whatever they want so long as it doesn't call for the removal of the democratic state. Unfortunately the hard left doesn't seem to give this much track.

Shenshen · 02-08-2018 11:46AM

somefeen wrote: »

I disagree with both of you.
The fugees were a great band.
Sadly that's another publicly unacceptable opinion

Sadly, they ended up overshadowed by the beegees.

Shenshen · 02-08-2018 11:51AM

Mike Hoch wrote: »

That's some pretty awful examples.

There is a campaign to boycott advertisers who pay for ad space with the Daily Mail, in an effort to shut down the aforementioned columnists, to deprive them of employment with a media outlet that agrees to broadcast their views.

The likes of Watson live under an impending permanent ban from the various social media sites. Of course, it's their perogative what they want on their networks, but to say he has an unrestricted right to free speech is pushing it.

I don't understand the hype about Peterson at all, I got bored after 12 minutes of listening to him, but there were the usual muppets protesting and handing out flyers at his point depot gig recently.

Take the case with Katie Ascough. She was forced out of her position because she was unwilling to break the law. Granted, the law handily correlated with her own personal beliefs, but the bottom line is she was forced out because of both who her parents are and that she wouldn't pull Mandela and break laws she agreed with on behalf of those who didn't. Contrast that with Ibrahim Halawa- he's also the offspring of a prominent religious conservative. You won't find anyone from the crowd who kicked Ascough out asking Halawa where he stood on the two recent referendums (even former golden cow John Connors copped the ire of the right on brigade for his abortion stance.)

I couldn't care less what anyone's views are. I think that within reason anyone should talk about whatever they want so long as it doesn't call for the removal of the democratic state. Unfortunately the hard left doesn't seem to give this much track.

Do people still conflate the right to say what you want without legal repercussions with the right to be given a platform off your choice to say it from?

uptherebels · 02-08-2018 12:10PM

Mike Hoch wrote: »

Take the case with Katie Ascough. She was forced out of her position because she was unwilling to break the law. Granted, the law handily correlated with her own personal beliefs, but the bottom line is she was forced out because of both who her parents are and that she wouldn't pull Mandela and break laws she agreed with on behalf of those who didn't.

Seeing as how people knew who she was and who her parents were when she was voted in , you don't get to play that card. She agreed not to interfere with the pro choice standing in the students union and was removed when people realised she was lieing.

Why would a staunch anti choicer become the head of a pro choice organisation? I give you a hint.... To interfere.

Mike Hoch · 02-08-2018 12:14PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Do people still conflate the right to say what you want without legal repercussions with the right to be given a platform off your choice to say it from?

Legal repercussions vs repercussions on your ability to earn a wage are two completely different things. Generally speaking there are no legal repercussions for saying anything in Ireland, bar the unenforced blasphemy laws. But the list of people who have suffered loss of earnings by their comments is numerous- George Hook, Eamon Dunphy, Jackson and Olding, Katie Aiscough (I'm assuming her position was a paid one?), the list goes on. I just don't think its a level playing field that, say, Lily Allen or J.K Rowling aren't dropped from their labels or publisher for their champagne socialist utterings, yet people on the other side of the spectrum can be fecked out over their opinions.

ohnonotgmail · 02-08-2018 12:16PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Do people still conflate the right to say what you want without legal repercussions with the right to be given a platform off your choice to say it from?

Worryingly there does appear to be a large cohort of people who still believe this nonsense.

Mike Hoch · 02-08-2018 12:17PM

uptherebels wrote: »

Seeing as how people knew who she was and who her parents were when she was voted in , you don't get to play that card. She agreed not to interfere with the pro choice standing in the students union and was removed when people realised she was lieing.

By refusing to take a stand of violating the laws of the land?

It would seem the average student didn't know or didn't care who she was associated with. Didn't she survive the first impeachment vote due to a lac of interest?

Why would a staunch anti choicer become the head of a pro choice organisation? I give you a hint.... To interfere.

The union is not a pro choice organisation. It's a student union. You might as well call the Irish Times a pro choice organisation instead of a newspaper.

Mind you, you're probably the type who thinks Domino's Pizza is a right wing Catholic advocacy group.

the_pen_turner · 02-08-2018 12:30PM

This year has been one of the worst years weather wise. You could do very little

tom1ie · 02-08-2018 12:46PM

The more equal women get with regards to media share and pay etc, the more aggressive towards men, especially while driving, women get.
Is this view unacceptable?
By media share I mean women’s opinions in the media, being presenters of media shows (news talk anyone?) etc.

yourdeadwright · 02-08-2018 12:57PM

Gay pride day should be changed to Equality day, That way it includes everyone and no ones left out which was the issues to start with ,

Stone Deaf 4evr · 02-08-2018 01:02PM

As i scroll through this thread, a part of me secretly fears that to thank any post will flag me as some sort of racist/sexist/facist/ist-ist.

pawdee · 02-08-2018 01:05PM

U2 are (and always have been) shyte.

TomSweeney · 02-08-2018 01:22PM

I don't like the Beatles - never have.

Technocentral · 02-08-2018 01:26PM

Try_harder wrote: »

Funny the opinions like the ops are all I see in Boards of late - must be be acceptable on boards. Eventually people get tired of listening to it and move on somewhere else.

After Hours is a dominated by the Irish far right, sad.

Technocentral · 02-08-2018 01:32PM

manonboard wrote: »

I have concerns and questions i'd like to discuss regards transgender-ism, but unfortunately it is a topic that attracts alot of hate if the mainstream left narrative is questioned. The right just tend to be too insecure to discuss it either for the opposite reason.

I dont really care that people do it or not. Its not my body or experiences. Maybe its no different than my desire to add bulk to my slim body.

I do have grave concerns about the encouragement of 'identity' in various ways. Suppose a person is born in a body A, and they feel odd in it...and want body B. We currently teach them that they should of been born in body B, and that B is truly who they are....
Well that makes no sense in my understanding. You are C. C is a body of A with urges for B. That C is going to change alot, and isnt really the same C. It's just the arising condition of C temporarily.

People with body A don't know what its like to be in body B so its incorrect to even suggest its a correct one for them. I find it tends to be far more how they are treated, and that points to a societal issue that we should not be treating people in body A in a way that they dont want to be treated.

I think its a very mentally unhealthy thing to teach people that the way they are born is not ok if they have a desire/urge/compulsion to be different.
I think its fine to help them change if they want, but it's a very very odd thing we are doing teaching identity different than what we currently are is a positive thing.
I practice Buddhism, and after a decade, the concept of trying to keep and form a static identity is a very suffering based idea. Not one i'd encourage for people to follow, for their own sake.

It's not a left/right issue, a lot on the left are critical of Transgender agenda too.

lassykk · 02-08-2018 01:41PM

oneilla wrote: »

Anyway, I dislike dogs and this is a near-universally unacceptable opinion. There are far too many dogs in urban areas. The barking and public defecation attracts my ire the most. Not interested in the usual "good vs bad dog owners" debate. I don't like dogs and those who harp on about them being so intelligent and great companions sound like idiots oddballs. Want a dog? Go live with it on a big farm somewhere or in the wilderness thousands of years ago away from people who want to walk on public paths and through parks in peace.

I couldn't agree with you more! It's so rare to see someone who agrees with me on this!!!

Hotblack Desiato · 02-08-2018 01:48PM

keffiyeh wrote: »

You might think you can wriggle out of it with intellectual dishonesty, but it won't work. Firstly, Ireland is part of a union, so it's not just our rules. Secondly, it is within our rules to accept fugees. You can drop the idiot band reference, you're not funny. The Irish got their chance to survive, those currently in a situation should be allowed the same. You're attitude comes down to "**** you got mine" which just seems borderline sociopathic to me.

We're not bound to do anything except what our laws provide for and the international agreements we've entered into provide for. These can change, or be withdrawn from.

Using juvenile, stupid terminology just makes your posts look stupid and juvenile.

Yes it is their country their rules, our country our rules, unless you want to abolish all borders in the world and all private property?

Can anyone who feels like it come and stay in your home, or is it your home your rules?

Ireland is our collective home and we decide, through our governments, who gets to come and live here. And if governments don't clamp down on the blatant p!ss-taking, sure as eggs are eggs there will be an electoral backlash.

Undividual · 02-08-2018 02:13PM

Technocentral wrote: »

Try_harder wrote: »

Funny the opinions like the ops are all I see in Boards of late - must be be acceptable on boards. Eventually people get tired of listening to it and move on somewhere else.

After Hours is a dominated by the Irish far right, sad.

I don't know if I agree with that, but in any case, why specifically is that sad?

I don't understand why people who hold differing political opinions don't debate the issues. It seems to me that people on the right are conveniently labelled as a way of avoiding dialogue.

I put my thoughts in the OP and someone commented saying that it was a way of me looking for validation on my sh*tty opinions. By definition I don't understand why my opinions are sh*tty as they are based upon my life experience. If I thought they were sh*tty they would instantly change.

Squeeonline · 02-08-2018 02:15PM

If the gender pay-gap is real, then why aren't companies hiring only women to save 20% of their labour costs?

Maybe women take jobs that have different benefits that are not measured financially the same. More flexible working hours for example.

Whether jobs like primary teacher, or nurse should be valued more is a different debate.

I also firmly believe that if men were given more (or dare I say, equal) paternity leave, it would give women the choice to return to work earlier. But you try suggesting something that benefits men on the surface to give women the benefit. You'll be thrown out of whatever room you're in and branded a Mens right activist.

Believe it or not, equality means equal, not just for things that benefit women.

Kyle More · 02-08-2018 02:20PM

super_furry wrote: »

A child’s got more bones than a grown-up’s got.

A CHILD'S GOT MORE BONES THAN A GROWN UP'S GOT?

*click* *click* and that's a nat-ur-al law *click*

Huexotzingo · 02-08-2018 02:28PM

Mike Hoch wrote: »

By refusing to take a stand of violating the laws of the land?

It would seem the average student didn't know or didn't care who she was associated with. Didn't she survive the first impeachment vote due to a lac of interest?

The union is not a pro choice organisation. It's a student union. You might as well call the Irish Times a pro choice organisation instead of a newspaper.

Mind you, you're probably the type who thinks Domino's Pizza is a right wing Catholic advocacy group.

Lol, give it a rest. You lost the Referendum.

Publicly unacceptable opinions

Comments