Overly Sensitive People on the Internet.

Yellowblackbird · 06-03-2013 06:37PM

hollster2 wrote: »

no he didnt but everyones allowed to there opinion im was just giving an example of how bad cyber bullying can go and dont think the video he put and what he said appropriate!!

No that's not at all the point you were making. Have a read back at your post if you can't remember. You were trying to guilt trip him mentioning the dead girls.

Agricola · 06-03-2013 06:56PM

Society in the west is gone soft. Its all about "feelings" and "my opinion" and "respect my right to blah blah blah"
What these facebooking, twittering manbabys need is to be packed off to a good aul war. If they come back from that they wont spend their time worrying about what some tool online thinks of them.
Fúck, Ive to go. Mammy has the dinner ready.

ScumLord · 06-03-2013 07:33PM

Agricola wrote: »

Society in the west is gone soft. Its all about "feelings" and "my opinion" and "respect my right to blah blah blah"

But only your own feelings and opinions matter. Even if they're wrong your entitled to have them and feel hard done by if you have to entertain other peoples opinions.

06-03-2013 07:36PM

Madam_X wrote: »

Oh the one that translates as "I can say what I like but I'll take exception to abusive comments directed at myself"?

It seems to be fashionable to say "Get over it, you have a choice to be upset" - yeh sure, let's deflect responsibility onto the person who's on the receiving end. All that "free thpeech" moaning is the same - it gets forgotten that free speech goes both ways.
You don't always choose to be offended. We all know there are moan-bags who find offence in anything, but it's becoming such that those with genuine grievances get lumped in with the latter.

I find it very suspect when people complain about people being over-sensitive - screams "I want to be allowed be a dick!" to me. And they're the very people who get uppity when people disagree with them, let alone insult them.

Exactly. The very idea that you can choose to be offended/upset is absolute bollix. Some comments are just offensive and it's very hard not to let it get to you, even if you know the person is just a d*ck.

biko · 06-03-2013 07:53PM

I'm so hipsta I liked bullying before it was popular.

CollardGreens · 06-03-2013 08:35PM

The OP video, how silly! If someone is rude then ignore them. Kids take things so serious. It's the flipping internet, they should get a grip or turn it the heck off.

Madam_X · 06-03-2013 09:19PM

danniemcq wrote: »

if you (for example are gay and go to a comedian who makes a gay joke (frankie boyle for instance) there are things to consider.

You know what frankie boyle is like, you know what type of material he uses, you should also realise he isn't doing this to hurt anyone as he assumes that people are going to take what he says with a pinch of salt. if you are offended then you kinda need to get over it.

If however frankie came down into the audience and up to you yourself and shouted homophobic remarks at you then he is being a dick and you are in the right.

in much the same way like i said before if someone says a your ma/da/sister/brother joke in a group they should not feel in the wrong if someone has lost that relation. granted if it happened that morning or whatever a sorry for your loss i didn't realise is appropriate (been on both sides of this one) and when the offended sees that no harm was meant then well ... where is the harm?

Yeh exactly, it's about intention, but according to the "free speech/PC gone mad/people choose to be offended" brigade, even if the intent behind it is malicious and personal, it just needs to be "gotten over" and ignored... abdicating the responsibility from the person who is actually behind it, and moving it to the person on the receiving end, which I just don't understand. It's from the "People only let themselves be bullied" school of thought, which is kinda disturbing.
If they don't get bothered by it (which I'd doubt): fine, but where do they get off, demanding others feel the same way as they do?

clairefontaine · 06-03-2013 10:34PM

Madam_X wrote: »

Yeh exactly, it's about intention, but according to the "free speech/PC gone mad/people choose to be offended" brigade, even if the intent behind it is malicious and personal, it just needs to be "gotten over" and ignored... abdicating the responsibility from the person who is actually behind it, and moving it to the person on the receiving end, which I just don't understand. It's from the "People only let themselves be bullied" school of thought, which is kinda disturbing.
If they don't get bothered by it (which I'd doubt): fine, but where do they get off, demanding others feel the same way as they do?

Unfortunately the same people who often spout about free speech and the first amendment are the last to understand it. It is not absolute, even in the country that created it. For example, the famous example of crying fire in a movie theatre is not protected under it and neither is watching child pornography. It doesn't mean you can say whatever the hell you feel like saying.

The thing too about free speech, yes you can talk all you like but that doesn't mean others have to listen to you.

On the other hand, you have to develop a tolerance for ideas you might not like, but you don't have to take personal crap from people. And of course this is not school or work, on a message board, you don't have to be here, which makes it entirely different from social media stuff and facing those same kids in school every day.

P_1 · 06-03-2013 10:36PM

There is a difference between avoiding something that may offend you and avoiding something offensive that is directed towards you personally.

Some folk would be wise to remember that.

hollster2 · 07-03-2013 01:16PM

Yellowblackbird wrote: »

No that's not at all the point you were making. Have a read back at your post if you can't remember. You were trying to guilt trip him mentioning the dead girls.[/QUOT

NO I WASNT THATS WHAT THE VIDEOS ABOUT TO PREVENT CYBERBULLING AND THIS HAPPENED TO THESE GIRLS WHY WOULD I TRY TO GUILT TRIP SOMEONE ITS NOT HIS FAULT JUST THE WAY HES TALKING ABOUT IT YOU DIDNT READ MY POST PROPERLY WHAT YOUVE SAID IS RIDICULOUS

MadYaker · 07-03-2013 01:30PM

I THINK YOUR CAPS LOCK MIGHT BE BROKEN.

hollster2 · 07-03-2013 05:10PM

MadYaker wrote: »

I THINK YOUR CAPS LOCK MIGHT BE BROKEN.

I was half way through when I seen caps was on lol

Too lazy to do it again!!:pac:

Herb Powell · 07-03-2013 05:33PM

danniemcq wrote: »

A good example is the "most retarded thing you have done thread". 99% of the posters if not more have no issue but there are a handful of people who are hurt by the thread title.

The thing is i often looked at that thread an not once did i see retarded as anything other than stupid. I have personal experience with mentally challenged people in my family but that thread was not about them or anyone like them it was about stupid things you had done. The negative conentations with the word "retarded" was never crossed most people minds past the i'm an eejit bit.

Haha, I got a ban out of that ages ago for calling out some fella for being a sanctimonious cuunt, pretty much exactly what you said. Agree 100%

jugger0 · 07-03-2013 06:45PM

The west is soft in general these days, back in the olden days young lads were running through hails of machine gun bullets to stab each other in the eye with bayonets, now we have nancy boys with skinny jeans and lesbian haircuts.

crazygeryy · 07-03-2013 06:57PM

yes they are all on boards.ie
they are called mods.

Scruffles · 08-03-2013 01:36AM

danniemcq wrote: »

A good example is the "most retarded thing you have done thread". 99% of the posters if not more have no issue but there are a handful of people who are hurt by the thread title.

The thing is i often looked at that thread an not once did i see retarded as anything other than stupid. I have personal experience with mentally challenged people in my family but that thread was not about them or anyone like them it was about stupid things you had done. The negative conentations with the word "retarded" was never crossed most people minds past the i'm an eejit bit.

I know some people are affected a lot more than i am and may take some offence but taking the power out of the word (ie take the negative meaning and making it more "normal") is surely a greater good.

In much the same way i can take jokes about family members despite having family members who have passed on without taking offence.

For example if i meet someone in the pub and there is craic going and someone makes a joke about "your ma/da/sister/brother" whatever unless they specifically say danniemcq your dead ma/da/sister/brother was a c*nt then i would take offence.

What i often find online is that people who take the most offence are often the most offensive in other ways. For example someone on facebook i know recently posted about how he didn't like a certain type of jokes. Scroll down through his timeline and he is bitching and complaining about those black c*nts etc.

boards/ah is not representative of society.
the problem with retard/retarded is that of course it will not offend many people who do not have direct experience with the effects of it,there is not enough awareness of how it impacts those of us with intelectual disability because we do not have the same level of ability to communicate awareness,express our issues and go and create the activism that gay people and people of whatever skin colour is the minority are able to do.

it doesnt matter what excuses people use,the reason retarded is used is because it is associated with our disability,people think theyre calling someone or something slow and/or stupid;they do not seem to realise what they are actualy doing is insulting those of us with the disability,not what they are directing the slur at.

we have been bullied,discriminated and judged through our entire lives with these labels, is it any wonder why we feel such lack of self worth when people kick up a fuss on here if racial or sexuality based slurs are used yet they casualy throw around a label which has major conotations and history involved for those of us with intelectual disability?
instead of assuming we are just being sensitive,perhaps find out why its offensive to those of us affected by it first.
am certainly not sensitive; am a user of self deprecating humour and go on sickipedia, but have been severely bullied entire life due to disabilities,was called various id slurs by teachers at school never mind the kids,and even now am still targeted on the internet because people have absolutely f-all basic manners/respect for us that they will give to our fellow users,we are dehumanised by these labels and its unfortunate that people are blind to it or dont want to see it.
many of us are not wanting to ban the word,its about creating awareness and making peopel realise we are human as well and dont deserve to be the butt of peoples bigotism and ignorance.

woud recommend speaking to mencap if want to find out how the term is damaging ,they had done a campaign on it a good while back.
woud also recommend a read of these-
http://www.mencap.org.uk/news/article/ofcom-misjudges-channel-4-viewers
a channel 4 poll showed three out of four people found the word retard offensive.

http://www.r-word.org/
a long campaign ran by the special olympics,lots of input from those of us with id or similar disabilities, have also got a story published on there.

ScumLord · 08-03-2013 11:52AM

Retard does actually mean to slow or hinder. If anything the word makes more sense in the way it's generally used as a slur against something or someone. It would be an insult if used against someone with a mental disability to describe their condition but I think the way it's being used in the general population is more in line with the actual meaning of the word and if anything it's popularity is pulling it away form a descriptive term for someone with a mental disability. In a generations time people just won't associate the word with any disability.

clairefontaine · 08-03-2013 01:31PM

ScumLord wrote: »

Retard does actually mean to slow or hinder. If anything the word makes more sense in the way it's generally used as a slur against something or someone. It would be an insult if used against someone with a mental disability to describe their condition but I think the way it's being used in the general population is more in line with the actual meaning of the word and if anything it's popularity is pulling it away form a descriptive term for someone with a mental disability. In a generations time people just won't associate the word with any disability.

No I think when people use it they are using it to tell someone they have chromosomal abnormalities. I would suspect that most people who use this word have no idea it means to slow down orginially.

Overly Sensitive People on the Internet.

Comments