I don't appreciate those kinds of jokes I was talking more along the lines of RICH people in general but lets face it, most Rich people are White. But if you don't like that insinuation than fine, Rich people it is. Either way my point is that people should be aiming their arrows higher because that way they might actually hit something worthwhile.Brian OA wrote:
It was a joke And how is antagonizing white people not racist?
That's very unbecoming of you, given the large amount of ironic claims you make here and all My point is that people shouldn't be pointing fingers at others based on sweeping generalizations with no proper basis. That just allows the wheel of hatred to keep spinning and you're just directing it at a group you're more comfortable hating on.SaigonAlice wrote:
I don't appreciate those kinds of jokes I was talking more along the lines of RICH people in general but lets face it, most Rich people are White. But if you don't like that insinuation than fine, Rich people it is. Either way my point is that people should be aiming their arrows higher because that way they might actually hit something worthwhile.Brian OA wrote:
It was a joke And how is antagonizing white people not racist?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/1 ... =Australia anyway Rich kid kill four people and two years later is spending vacation in Mexico like nothing fucking happened. Why am I not surprised.
Well, if you pay attention to the OP it's actually the opposite. The title used to be different until sometime a few months ago when Wojjan swung by and then asked to change the OP title to what it is now, more line with its predecessor.Nameless wrote:
Isn't this supposed to be a thread about things that AREN'T interesting or funny? I found this argument/debate interesting. Call 911.
What claims lolBrian OA wrote:
That's very unbecoming of you, given the large amount of ironic claims you make here and all My point is that people shouldn't be pointing fingers at others based on sweeping generalizations with no proper basis. That just allows the wheel of hatred to keep spinning and you're just directing it at a group you're more comfortable hating on.
That incident, while tragic and unfair to those victims, doesn't mean we should be outraged towards rich people. Maybe to the kid, his family, his friends, and the court involved, but not anyone else. That would just be unfair to them.
t/400398SaigonAlice wrote:
What claims lolBrian OA wrote:
That's very unbecoming of you, given the large amount of ironic claims you make here and all My point is that people shouldn't be pointing fingers at others based on sweeping generalizations with no proper basis. That just allows the wheel of hatred to keep spinning and you're just directing it at a group you're more comfortable hating on.
That incident, while tragic and unfair to those victims, doesn't mean we should be outraged towards rich people. Maybe to the kid, his family, his friends, and the court involved, but not anyone else. That would just be unfair to them.
1. That was an insult against Sapiosexuals and MOGAI shitfest in general. That was a very intracommunity joke that I wouldn't expect many of you to understand. Also, I'm gay I can make jokes about myself lolBrian OA wrote:
t/400398
t/397729
t/398451
Just by the by, if I just happen to insult Richie Rich I don't think they'd give a fuck considering all they'd need to feel better was to squeeze their diamond encrusted stress ball and have a jolly old time swimming in their money pool.Still doesn't make it okay. Sure, he's better off in the world than 99% of people, he has better odds of taking it, and he might have no reason to take it to heart, but that's still no reason to take it out on him. He's still a person, it's wrong, and it's a bad thing to do.
Brian OA wrote:
1. Nobody would know that; you could've easily offended someone else. Being part of a group doesn't make it right to make fun of it, either.
Anyone with any self-identifying label that has no significant historical context of being oppressed, are oppressed! Wine-moms? Oppressed. Salsa-dancers? Oppressed. People who like to move-it move-it? OPPRESSED!Brian OA wrote:
2. It may not be mocked by the majority (arguably), but that doesn't make it right to, either. Some people identify with that. Perhaps not with the same zeal as some TV shows make out, but unlike in the past, many are practically brought up with games as much more than just a pastime.
3. It may not be mocked by the majority (arguably), but that doesn't make it right to, either. People have still been persecuted historically for holding certain ideas and beliefs, and I think that speaks enough for itself.
They're still jokes of the same nature I made before. Ironic claims. Ultimately they're either acceptable by nature or by what demographic they're aimed at. Up to you.
Brian OA wrote:
Still doesn't make it okay. Sure, he's better off in the world than 99% of people, he has better odds of taking it, and he might have no reason to take it to heart, but that's still no reason to take it out on him. He's still a person, it's wrong, and it's a bad thing to do.
Trying to solve social issues by being more of a jerk to a selective group of people isn't going to do much. At most, you'll tip the scales and become the same thing as the supposedly bad people you're trying to denounce. And there's still going to be jerks all over the place.
so passionate, it's cuteEneT wrote:
Nah, my reasoning isn't as stupid and shallow as that.
Fat people are the perfect representation of humanity's increasing greed and descent. Being fat was and never should be considered acceptable. In a world that was originally a survival of the fittest, modern times offers so much luxury that people have grown weak and lazy; gluttonous and lacking of self-control. Unlike physical or mental disabilities, being fat is a life choice. It was there choice to become unhealthy; it was there choice to become unfit. A lot of them choose to stay that way and that isn't okay. They're lazy and choose not to improve upon themselves. Keyword 'choose' and 'choice'. This is something that applies to nearly every fat person.
Now moving to something less generalised... There are certain fat people that just piss me off by complaining about how fat people are not considered beautiful. Well, of course not you bitch, you're an unhealthy piece of shit. Why the fuck are you complaining when you chose to stuff yourself with a whole lot of shit, when the least you could of done was eat more healthier and exercise for once instead of complaining how you're not considered beautiful when you clearly didn't put enough effort in trying to be. Why the hell should you be considered beautiful when you put no effort into your own body? Stupid people.
To summarise, fat people all lack something, and that, is effort. They complain about being bullied or being fat shamed when they clearly need a wake up call and realise that their way of life is wrong (there is no 'right' way to live life, but there is a 'wrong' way). They are lazy and the fact that they choose to be; the fact that they chose this path is despicable. No other kind of person disgusts me more and the only ones exempt are those that actually attempt to improve themselves.
It doesn't matter if you are straight or not.SaigonAlice wrote:
Brian OA wrote:
1. Nobody would know that; you could've easily offended someone else. Being part of a group doesn't make it right to make fun of it, either.What if I, an actual gay person, was the true Homophobe all along?
Like I said, its an intracommunity joke that's easily recognisable as sarcasm in LGBT spaces. The only thing that's considered really shitty of fellow gay people to do is to call someone else the Q-slur (which is reclaimed by some but not by others) or assign labels to them without their consent. Either way, you do realise you're a straight person accusing me, a gay guy, for being homophobic? irony.jpg
You don't have the power to oppress salsa-dancers all by yourself, but nobody claimed that you do that anyways. The point is, that you can still be a douche to them and make someones day slightly worse, which shouldn't be okSaigonAlice wrote:
Anyone with any self-identifying label that has no significant historical context of being oppressed, are oppressed! Wine-moms? Oppressed. Salsa-dancers? Oppressed. People who like to move-it move-it? OPPRESSED!Brian OA wrote:
2. It may not be mocked by the majority (arguably), but that doesn't make it right to, either. Some people identify with that. Perhaps not with the same zeal as some TV shows make out, but unlike in the past, many are practically brought up with games as much more than just a pastime.[
3. It may not be mocked by the majority (arguably), but that doesn't make it right to, either. People have still been persecuted historically for holding certain ideas and beliefs, and I think that speaks enough for itself.
They're still jokes of the same nature I made before. Ironic claims. Ultimately they're either acceptable by nature or by what demographic they're aimed at. Up to you.
er what languages do you speak then?Reditum wrote:
Today I realized that whenever I talk to people from foreign countries, I always refer to them in the third person.
I have no idea why I do this because I don't do that in English
Help
And the weird thing is that I'm speaking English to these people but like I guess when people just have less solid English skills I subconsciously go into third person mode
Actually during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, obesity was considered a sign of wealth and prosperity and a good characteristic.EneT wrote:
Fat people are the perfect representation of humanity's increasing greed and descent. Being fat was and never should be considered acceptable.
