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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Are you taking part in any LGBTQ events for pride month?

Options
1…1112141617…28

Comments

  • Options
    #392
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Hard to ignore something that is not even there in the first place. There is nothing condescending about it. I think for useful and informative discourse to occur on any issue that is a minimum standard we should be working with.
    .
    then that someone has lost the debate and lost bad and should be politely asked to leave to allow the grown ups keep talking.

    Nope, definitely not condescending at all.


  • Options
    #393
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Nope, definitely not condescending at all.

    Nope, not in the slightest. Glad we now agree.

    I think when we have important discourse on important topics in any fora of import, like our halls of power for example, we need to ensure people reach a minimum standard in that discussion.

    And I see nothing condescending about suggesting that if people are taking the approach that you can not discuss some group, or empathise with them, unless you yourself are of that group..... then that speaker has not shown the minimum standard of maturity to be in the discussion.

    Alas I see it often. Across a wide range of topics. Most often in discussions around the police in the US in relation to people of colour for example. But that is only the most common of a range of examples I see it in. It is quite prevalent in gender issues too.


  • Options
    #394
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cgcsb wrote: »
    And despite all that, YOU still do not know what life is like from a gay persons perspective. Yet you still tell us in technicolour detail that all our worries are over. We'll decide that for ourselves, thanks.

    And YOU can only speak for yourself. You don't know what life is like from another gay persons perspective. "We"?? You aren't spokesman, sorry, spokesperson, for all things gay. You might have an issue with your sexuality and feel punished, but thankfully, most don't.

    Sort your own issues out.


  • Options
    #395
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Nope, not in the slightest. Glad we now agree.

    I think when we have important discourse on important topics in any fora of import, like our halls of power for example, we need to ensure people reach a minimum standard in that discussion.

    And I see nothing condescending about suggesting that if people are taking the approach that you can not discuss some group, or empathise with them, unless you yourself are of that group..... then that speaker has not shown the minimum standard of maturity to be in the discussion.

    Alas I see it often. Across a wide range of topics. Most often in discussions around the police in the US in relation to people of colour for example. But that is only the most common of a range of examples I see it in. It is quite prevalent in gender issues too.

    the only person who mentioned empathise was you. You are arguing against something that was never said. So much for a minimum standard.


  • Options
    #396
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    the only person who mentioned empathise was you. You are arguing against something that was never said. So much for a minimum standard.

    So we are to go to the level of mere linguistic pedantry in responding to me now are we?

    As I said I made a general point about things that WERE said and I further generalised it by mentioning other things like empathy which are very much related. If the locus of your disagreement has now moved away from what I said, to single words I used while saying it, then you might wanna be sure the pedals do not come off when used in reverse.

    My initial response was to the user who said "My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle." and the ability to empathise is a large aspect of doing exactly that.

    No issues of failing to meet standards linguistically here therefore. On my side at least.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #397
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    So we are to go to the level of mere linguistic pedantry in responding to me now are we?

    As I said I made a general point about things that WERE said and I further generalised it by mentioning other things like empathy which are very much related. If the locus of your disagreement has now moved away from what I said, to single words I used while saying it, then you might wanna be sure the pedals do not come off when used in reverse.

    My initial response was to the user who said "My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle." and the ability to empathise is a large aspect of doing exactly that.

    No issues of failing to meet standards linguistically here therefore. On my side at least.

    You're not really one to talk about linguistic pedantry. You mentioned empathise first and then claimed you were not allowed to empathise with gay. This is patently false and nobody has suggested you can't. No linguistic pedantry required.


  • Options
    #398
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    You're not really one to talk about linguistic pedantry.

    In that I do not use it as a get out card of desperation, sure. But I can empathise with why you might.
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    You mentioned empathise first and then claimed you were not allowed to empathise with gay.

    I never made any such claim. Anywhere. You just made that up and shoved it in my mouth.


  • Options
    #399
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    In that I do not use it as a get out card of desperation, sure. But I can empathise with why you might.



    I never made any such claim. Anywhere. You just made that up and shoved it in my mouth.

    if you're going to just blanket deny saying it i'll leave it there.


  • Options
    #400
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    if you're going to just blanket deny saying it i'll leave it there.

    Or the more honest approach might be to QUOTE me saying it, or admit you can't when you fail to.

    I however, in case I said something by error, or typed something wrong, just read over ALL The posts I just made today on the thread to check. It ain't there. Sorry for ya.


  • Options
    #401
    This is it
    Registered Users Posts: 5,185 ✭✭✭This is it


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    if you're going to just blanket deny saying it i'll leave it there.

    If you both could that'd be great :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #402
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Or the more honest approach might be to QUOTE me saying it, or admit you can't when you fail to.

    I however, in case I said something by error, or typed something wrong, just read over ALL The posts I just made today on the thread to check. It ain't there. Sorry for ya.

    is this sufficient for you?
    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I think the moment anyone, on nearly any side of nearly any issue, suggests you can not understand.... empathise..... make a comment..... or be part of the discussion because you are NOT part of the group..... then that someone has lost the debate and lost bad and should be politely asked to leave to allow the grown ups keep talking.


  • Options
    #403
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    is this sufficient for you?

    Nope. Because I did not ask you to quote me using the word. Though thanks for proving "nozzferrahhtoos first law of internet forums" again :)

    I asked you to quote where I claimed I "not allowed to empathise with gay". Which is something I simply never once said. You wholesale entirely made it up for me.

    Merely quoting me using a word does not mean I ONCE used it the way you pretended I did.


  • Options
    #404
    SJW Fan
    Site Banned Posts: 1 ✭SJW Fan


    I'll be celebrating with a trip to Russia.


  • Options
    #405
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Nope. Because I did not ask you to quote me using the word. Though thanks for proving "nozzferrahhtoos first law of internet forums" again :)

    I asked you to quote where I claimed I "not allowed to empathise with gay". Which is something I simply never once said. You wholesale entirely made it up for me.

    Merely quoting me using a word does not mean I ONCE used it the way you pretended I did.

    OHFFS. no wonder people get banned when they start discussing anything with you.


  • Options
    #406
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,275 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Deleted User wrote: »
    And YOU can only speak for yourself.

    exactly, which makes a straight person saying that 'it's over' even more ridiculous, I can't even declare it 'over' for anyone other than myself.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    You don't know what life is like from another gay persons perspective. "We"?? You aren't spokesman, sorry, spokesperson, for all things gay.

    I'd be a better judge than you or spongebob though.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    You might have an issue with your sexuality and feel punished, but thankfully, most don't.

    Sort your own issues out.

    whatever


  • Options
    #407
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    OHFFS. no wonder people get banned when they start discussing anything with you.

    Not aware of many cases of that happening but since only one of us is making this personal, I can not comment on why people might get banned.

    I think you have fallen over yourself to the point you have lost the run of what my actual point(s) have been and are now inserting words in my mouth in order to merge the tangents rather than backtrack to where your errors began to merge them there.

    To summarise, I was responding to a user who was commenting they do not want to hold/express an opinion about a group they are no longer part of. I commented directly that this is in general a bad thing about Identity politics as a whole. And I then commented more GENERALLY on this, including issues of empathy, about how and why this is a bad thing. I gave an example from my relatively recent experience where a user was triggered by my suggesting I could feel empathy for the homeless.

    At no point anywhere did I suggest anyone told me I could not empathise with homosexuals however. I never said it. It never happened. I never implied it. I never suggested it. These words, and that position, simply never came from me. Only you. I made a direct point, and then a general point, and YOU have applied the latter in a way I never did. And I am afraid I can not apologise for that.


  • Options
    #408
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Not aware of many cases of that happening but since only one of us is making this personal, I can not comment on why people might get banned.

    I think you have fallen over yourself to the point you have lost the run of what my actual point(s) have been and are now inserting words in my mouth in order to merge the tangents rather than backtrack to where your errors began to merge them there.

    To summarise, I was responding to a user who was commenting they do not want to hold/express an opinion about a group they are no longer part of. I commented directly that this is in general a bad thing about Identity politics as a whole. And I then commented more GENERALLY on this, including issues of empathy, about how and why this is a bad thing. I gave an example from my relatively recent experience where a user was triggered by my suggesting I could feel empathy for the homeless.

    At no point anywhere did I suggest anyone told me I could not empathise with homosexuals however. I never said it. It never happened. I never implied it. I never suggested it. These words, and that position, simply never came from me. Only you.

    nobody has been triggered. the only people who use that are either trolling or shutting down debate. You said, and i am paraphrasing, the moment that anybody says you cannot empathise with a group unless you are a member of that group they have lost the debate. except nobody said you cannot do that. you made that up from nothing. you are arguing against something that was never said or implied.


  • Options
    #409
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cgcsb wrote: »
    exactly, which makes a straight person saying that 'it's over' even more ridiculous, I can't even declare it 'over' for anyone other than myself.



    I'd be a better judge than you or spongebob though.



    whatever

    No it doesn't. The poster was saying that on the whole, for the majority of gay people, Ireland is a fantastic and tolerant place to live. The fight for equality in pretty much every area is over for the majority of gay couples.

    You wouldn't be any better of a judge. Your personal experiences don't give you an affinity with anyone else just because you have the same sexual preference.

    People who are gay and have the same opinion as you are, thankfully, few and far between in my social circle. I do know a couple but they are outliers.

    You, telling people that you know more because you happen to feel persecuted doesn't give a fair reflection of Ireland as a whole. Ireland is objectively forward thinking and progressive when it comes to homosexuality.

    I'm sorry that you have bad experiences, but that doesn't give you the right to tell people that your opinion holds more weight than anyone elses.


  • Options
    #410
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    nobody has been triggered.

    There was at the time. I should be clear.... though I thought I already was.... I am referring to an experience on an entirely different thread months ago.
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    You said, and i am paraphrasing

    Well to be fair you are not so much paraphrasing as taking me saying X Y or Z and only mentioning Z. I think there is a difference between paraphrasing, and selective cherry picking, doncha think?
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    the moment that anybody says you cannot empathise with a group unless you are a member of that group they have lost the debate. except nobody said you cannot do that. you made that up from nothing. you are arguing against something that was never said or implied.

    Think you need to keep up with the thread a bit there.

    One user said "not being gay, you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about" and this was following a user, with intended irony, saying "You don't know what it's like to be straight and being wrongly accused of homophobia because you aren't straight so your opinion is invalid." which itself was a response to another user saying "Thanks for the input mr straight person, but we have a better insight into tackling homophobia than you do."

    So actually the narrative of Identity Politics exclusion was going on here, to the point castletownman wrote something I felt worthy of a response. However I responded to X, then generalized my point to X Y and Z, and now you are taking exception solely to Z in isolation to manufacture a version of my points different to the one I actually expressed.


  • Options
    #411
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    No it doesn't. The poster was saying that on the whole, for the majority of gay people, Ireland is a fantastic and tolerant place to live.
    cgcsb wrote: »
    exactly, which makes a straight person saying that 'it's over' even more ridiculous, I can't even declare it 'over' for anyone other than myself.

    I fear you are disagreeing past each other. As I find I am in agreement with most of what you are BOTH saying. I think Ireland IS a fantastic place to live for gay people. I think MUCH of the battle/war is won. But I ALSO think the battle is far from over and we need to keep going. Especially with people calling gay people infected zombies and the like.

    And it is a battle I have not, and have no intention of, fighting on with!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #412
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    There was at the time. I should be clear.... though I thought I already was.... I am referring to an experience on an entirely different thread months ago.



    Well to be fair you are not so much paraphrasing as taking me saying X Y or Z and only mentioning Z. I think there is a difference between paraphrasing, and selective cherry picking, doncha think?

    I selected the relevant part of what you said. My paraphrasing did not change the meaning of what you said.
    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Think you need to keep up with the thread a bit there.
    There you go with the condescension again. I'm not sure if you think this helps get your point across but it really doesn't.
    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    One user said "not being gay, you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about" and this was following a user, with intended irony, saying "You don't know what it's like to be straight and being wrongly accused of homophobia because you aren't straight so your opinion is invalid." which itself was a response to another user saying "Thanks for the input mr straight person, but we have a better insight into tackling homophobia than you do."

    So actually the narrative of Identity Politics exclusion was going on here, to the point castletownman wrote something I felt worthy of a response. However I responded to X, then generalized my point to X Y and Z, and now you are taking exception solely to Z in isolation to manufacture a version of my points different to the one I actually expressed.

    i take exception to it because you decided to throw it in based on nothing at all. nobody has made any objection to empathy


  • Options
    #413
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I fear you are disagreeing past each other. As I find I am in agreement with most of what you are BOTH saying. I think Ireland IS a fantastic place to live for gay people. I think MUCH of the battle/war is won. But I ALSO think the battle is far from over and we need to keep going. Especially with people calling gay people infected zombies and the like.

    And it is a battle I have not, and have no intention of, fighting on with!

    People are always going to be arseholes. We are never going to get 100% of the public to like gay people, muslims, black people, white people, straight people.

    Will the battle only be over when there is 100% tolerance?


  • Options
    #414
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    I selected the relevant part of what you said. My paraphrasing did not change the meaning of what you said.

    Except it really does. I should know, it is MY point I am making here. I fear the problem here is you do not actually understand my point, though I am happy to keep explaining it as long as you want me to, so you are not clear as to why you are mangling it.

    But suffice to say, you are claiming I said things I personally know I never said and you can not quote me saying. And this is proof positive you are not getting my point. Because once again....
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    There you go with the condescension again. I'm not sure if you think this helps get your point across but it really doesn't. i take exception to it because you decided to throw it in based on nothing at all. nobody has made any objection to empathy

    There is nothing condescending with requesting you keep up with the thread here because you are claiming things did not happen that did, and I am saying things I did not.

    I never claimed anyone is making an objection to empathy on this thread. What I DID respond to was a user who felt they could not make a point about a group they are not themselves part of. I responded to that point and BROADENED my point to a general one including things like empathy.

    I think the locus of your issue here is in missing that transition between my specific point and my broader one, and you have lost track of both since then.

    AGAIN here is my point, so maybe rather than push the false tangents you can respond to it more directly:

    A user feels they can not hold an opinion about a group they are not part of. In response I feel that this is one of the more insidious effects of identity politics, that it leaves people feeling that way. More broadly I think this stems from people in groups thinking there is no way people outside those groups can coherently have the experience, empathy, and credentials to have such opinions. Such as, as I said, the time I was told that having never been homeless it is ridiculous to think I could empathise with anyone who is homeless.

    This effect of identity politics in other words is one that comes from this thankfully minority notion about how empathy actually works.


  • Options
    #415
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Except it really does. I should know, it is MY point I am making here. I fear the problem here is you do not actually understand my point, though I am happy to keep explaining it as long as you want me to, so you are not clear as to why you are mangling it.

    But suffice to say, you are claiming I said things I personally know I never said and you can not quote me saying. And this is proof positive you are not getting my point. Because once again....



    There is nothing condescending with requesting you keep up with the thread here because you are claiming things did not happen that did, and I am saying things I did not.

    I never claimed anyone is making an objection to empathy on this thread. What I DID respond to was a user who felt they could not make a point about a group they are not themselves part of. I responded to that point and BROADENED my point to a general one including things like empathy.

    I think the locus of your issue here is in missing that transition between my specific point and my broader one, and you have lost track of both since then.

    AGAIN here is my point, so maybe rather than push the false tangents you can respond to it more directly:

    A user feels they can not hold an opinion about a group they are not part of. In response I feel that this is one of the more insidious effects of identity politics, that it leaves people feeling that way. More broadly I think this stems from people in groups thinking there is no way people outside those groups can coherently have the experience, empathy, and credentials to have such opinions. Such as, as I said, the time I was told that having never been homeless it is ridiculous to think I could empathise with anyone who is homeless.

    This effect of identity politics in other words is one that comes from this thankfully minority notion about how empathy actually works.

    well at least we are finally getting somewhere. and now perhaps you might start to see the point i am making. You broadened the point to include something that nobody could ever object to and i dont understand why you would do that. perhaps you think it strengthens the point you are trying to make. It doesn't.


  • Options
    #416
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    People are always going to be arseholes. We are never going to get 100% of the public to like gay people, muslims, black people, white people, straight people.

    Will the battle only be over when there is 100% tolerance?

    I never expect 100% anything in my life, but I make it my goal to strive towards it all the same. I think 100% tolerance will never happen. But I think there are enough genuine issues gay people have that we can meaningfully continue the discourse and the progress.

    EDIT: isn't it interesting for example, that while one user is claiming the war is not over and the other is claiming it is "won"...... the latter user has not actually stopped to say "Ok, could you lay out clearly the issues you think are still to be fought"?? Seemingly no interest in finding out, just in declaring the war "won" over and over. If I ever declare a war "won" and someone affected by it says "no it is not"..... my first..... no 2nd or 3rd or last..... reaction would be to ask the user in question to adumbrate the open issues for me! Why am I so different in this regard?

    But I ALSO agree entirely with you that on a scale comparing all the countries in our world Ireland is certainly one of the better ones for such people to live in. But I am not prone to "fatwa envy" really. That because we have it better than some other countries.... that we should stop the battle because we have "won".

    For example I still work on many issues of equality for women in Ireland. I do so knowing that life as a woman in Ireland compared to, say, Saudi Arabia makes it look like gender equality is "won" in Ireland.

    On gender issues and sexuality issues we are winning, and we are winning big I think here in Ireland. But I do not view the war as "won" either. So as I say.... I think I agree with 90% of what you are both saying and you appear from this outsider perspective to be disagreeing past each other quite a lot.


  • Options
    #417
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    and i dont understand why you would do that.

    I just explained why though. The last two paragraphs explain that.

    But if you know my posts at all, you will know that it is something I do a lot. I very very often make a direct point then a very general version of the same point, at the same time.

    Mainly because I find 999 times out of 1000 in my PERSONAL experience the latter illuminates the former in a helpful way, and helps people understand my point better. I have 1000s of posts of experience of this over many forums.

    1 time out of a 1000 however it results in the opposite. I feel that is what has happened with us here. And I blame neither of us for that. No communication methodology is perfect. It always breaks down somewhere. One just has to deal with that when it happens.


  • Options
    #418
    kunst nugget
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    A user feels they can not hold an opinion about a group they are not part of. In response I feel that this is one of the more insidious effects of identity politics, that it leaves people feeling that way. More broadly I think this stems from people in groups thinking there is no way people outside those groups can coherently have the experience, empathy, and credentials to have such opinions. Such as, as I said, the time I was told that having never been homeless it is ridiculous to think I could empathise with anyone who is homeless.

    This effect of identity politics in other words is one that comes from this thankfully minority notion about how empathy actually works.

    There is a point to be made that although you can empathise with a plight, unless you have experienced it yourself or gone through something very similar, you're never really going to fully understand it and the complexities that go with it.

    And that's just trying to empathise with someone.

    People that give advice to others without understanding or having any sympathy for what that person, or group, is going through can come across as dunderheaded at best or just plain mean and nasty at worst.

    Like telling an alcoholic to simply give up drink, sure didn't my neighbour Paul do it last year when he was on a health buzz and he was grand, you're just being lazy if you don't.

    I'll take my cue from the LGTB community. If the majority of that community still feel there's a need for Pride, then I'll take them at their word. When all is said and done, it make zero difference on my life as a straight man and causes me zero offence.


  • Options
    #419
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    kunst nugget wrote: »
    There is a point to be made that although you can empathise with a plight, unless you have experienced it yourself or gone through something very similar, you're never really going to fully understand it and the complexities that go with it.

    Thanks for the post. It was more level headed than even I was being so far. And I do try to stay level :)

    I agree to a point but I think the point is I would never use the word "fully". After all we are all individuals. I do not even think people IN a given group "fully" empathise with each other. Let alone people outside the group. Hell I find I can not even "fully" empathise with myself from 10 years ago any more! I have moved on enough that I would never even claim to "fully" empathise with an "early myself", let alone anyone else!

    But when a user like the one I (foolishly it now would seem) replied to feels they can not express an opinion about a group, or their situation, at all.......... then we are outside a realm where the user does not feel they can "fully" empathise. Or when someone loses the rag because I suggest I can empathise with homeless people, having never been homeless, for example........ then this person is not taking issue with me being able to "fully" empathise.

    And I merely bemoan the fact that Identity Politics is a big source of this in our world. I do not bemoan identity politics as a whole, as I see many people do on many forums. But just that specific awful aspect of it. On some issues.... I mentioned the issues the US have with police and people of color...... for example I even see people play that card on people who are 100% agreeing with them and supporting them! I myself once had my head textually bitten off for entirely siding with and agreeing with a black man on the city data forum..... by the man himself. For this very reason.

    Something is broken there. And I think we all benefit from working to fix it.
    kunst nugget wrote: »
    Like telling an alcoholic to simply give up drink

    Off topic but I stopped drinking in July 2016 as I thought I was on the cusp of developing an actual problem there. I thought I was addicted. So I went looking for a psychologist to help me start the process.

    There were none available in my area, all booked up, so I travelled by train 1 hour to Wurzburg to an actual addiction counsellor there.

    And his response to me having listened to me describe my issues to him, including the fact I was drinking 5 bottles of wine in 5 hours every friday night......... was "why do you not just give up drinking, why are you coming to me?".

    Needless to say I did not go back to him :)


  • Options
    #420
    Zorya
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭Zorya


    Well, the Queer's are out. It's all too corporate now, and RTE, the cops and the companies are just along for the ride, so they are sticking it to the Man...Umm, I mean...ahem....they have decided to pull out...ummm :pac:

    Never mind. Queer Action Ireland just do not approve. I think there is some truth in what they say here. Most of the corporate Pride stuff is opportunistic diversity marketing. At least I can say that out loud now safe in the knowledge that the radical queers have got my back. Yeah, baby.

    https://m.facebook.com/notes/queer-action-ireland/statement-from-queer-action-ireland-regarding-pride-alternative-2019/969131916781361/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #421
    Mr.Frame
    Registered Users Posts: 766 ✭✭✭Mr.Frame


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Yes they are. It is quite unusual to have two mammies or two daddies. It's much more common to either come from a mam and dad parent situation or a single parent situation than it is to be a child of a gay couple.

    So yes. It is unusual.

    No love, its not "that" unusual.


    Deleted User wrote: »
    No I'm not. I hate victim complexes. I think certain people on this thread are doing a disservice to the many people who embrace their sexuality without needing to chastise those who don't wholesale agree with their mindset.

    Absolutely nothing to do with "victim complexes" LGBT people are telling it like it is, whereas you on the other hand have no clue what its like for LGBT. But let me guess "you have a gay friend"
    Deleted User wrote: »
    You go do what you want to chief. Just don't accuse me of my mask slipping because I don't want my daughter to be part of a celebration of where you choose to put your penis/vagina

    Oh the irony of that paragraph. Your mask definitely slipped even further with that comment.

    So you dont want your daughter to be part of a celebration where I choose to put my penis? hahha

    What an utterly ridiculous thing to say.

    Its always amusing when people (you) , (who are definitely NOT homophobic,of course) look upon gay people merely as "sex acts" and what we do with our penis.

    Theres more to gay people than "sex". Always strange how so many people ,(who are definitely NOT homophobic) are obsessed with the sex lives of others


Advertisement