RE: dangerous men

RE: dangerous men (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:41:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Nah because the content of his posts is his choice. It's more like telling someone with a mohawk and a face full of piercings that there are going to be quite a few people who think they look ridiculous and will have no compunction in pointing that out. The content? If the content of his posts is a reflection of who he is, it's no more a "choice" than sexual inclination. unless we're saying it's his choice to be honest or to lie in order to make his posts seem more appealing... And, either way, we're excusing the reactive bias of someone based on the perception of initial bias from the original person. I'm not sure how any of us gets to claim maturity while espousing the "But he did it first!" mentality. Unless he's been speaking of things that involve forcing one's self upon a non-consenting person, I don't see where there's any reason to support aghast reactions.

EbonyWood -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:43:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt Sure it is. The point you seem to keep missing is that your words, posted here for all to see, will be responded to by the rest of the members as well. If you wish to avoid said responses, posting on an open forum may not be your best option. While the veracity of the point is clear, this is a bit like telling someone who has a facial deformity to suck up the fact that they'll get laughed at if they choose to participate in the public world outside their contained home. Which would be a worthwhile thing to say if they expected NOT to get laughed at. So Wyld's point holds, for all it's veracity. You could quote parts of this thread to show either that the OP has or hasn't reacted personally to constructive criticism of his claims. Personally, I don't think it's worth it either way. It's too close to the "Please hit me! Ow! Stop hitting me!" mentality of a lot of these threads that I've never identified with, nor want to. Maybe he's a latent masochist. Bottom line is a lot of his ideas and most of his method for conveying them doesn't resonate. I don't want to crucify him for that, but after 2 or 3 threads I do want to ignore the noise. Happy holidays.

WyldHrt -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:45:54 PM)
quote: While the veracity of the point is clear, this is a bit like telling someone who has a facial deformity to suck up the fact that they'll get laughed at if they choose to participate in the public world outside their contained home. Not fair, Nihilus, and rather inaccurate. Please note that osf formerly went by the nick "cillydom", and his posts under that nick are well phrased and clear in meaning. He's neither inexperienced nor socially incapable of participating productively on this board. He has chosen to post as he does, and I stand by what I said.

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:46:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl I'm going on very little sleep and I'm not wearing my glasses, but I've got a question..... are the posts of the OP hard to read/understand or is it just me? That is a good portion of it. It is possible for such a person to eventually get to a level of normal responses. There was a male dom that used to post here months ago (avatar with a cowboy hat, if I recall) who posted equally incomprehensible messages. Eventually he somehow managed to acquire enough thread-cred to where he wasn't being prodded at by grammatical and linguistic mockery at every turn. I was actually surprised, honestly. Probably even a bit confused, personally. I refrained from most of his comments anyway. However, it is possible to transcend that stigma. The OP, though, hasn't garnered any leeway due to coupling his wording style with abrasive-worded commentary and edgy suggestions.

EbonyWood -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:47:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl I'm going on very little sleep and I'm not wearing my glasses, but I've got a question..... are the posts of the OP hard to read/understand or is it just me? It's you. Please come see me for corrective therapy.

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:50:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt quote: While the veracity of the point is clear, this is a bit like telling someone who has a facial deformity to suck up the fact that they'll get laughed at if they choose to participate in the public world outside their contained home. Not fair, Nihilus, and rather inaccurate. Please note that osf formerly went by the nick "cillydom", and his posts under that nick are well phrased and clear in meaning. He's neither inexperienced nor socially incapable of participating productively on this board. He has chosen to post as he does, and I stand by what I said. So...we're saying that this fellow is an intentionally created sock-puppet character? If this can be verified, is there are issue with the ToS (I'm not sure about that specifically here, but other message boards I've been a part of were usually against any sock-puppets and would take measures to deal with instances of it)?

osf -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:51:12 PM)
how many dominant men have had the experience of "sub" women running around and protecting the delicate flower of new subbies from you? was the original post of this thread based on something that happened to me in the past, as far as im concerned there are too many rushing in to protect adult women that dont need protecting

WyldHrt -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:54:24 PM)
On this site, multiple screen names are allowed, so it is not a TOS violation. That said, "sock puppet" may well be accurate.

osf -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:55:01 PM)
zero, ill admit i havent your apparent education and ill admit your a better word smith than i am, but dont assume for a moment that im as dumb and illiterate as you think my biggest problem is typing as ive said no matter what the merits of their argument on line the better typist wins

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:55:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf how many dominant men have had the experience of "sub" women running around and protecting the delicate flower of new subbies from you? was the original post of this thread based on something that happened to me in the past, as far as im concerned there are too many rushing in to protect adult women that dont need protecting I have a PayPal account. I could charge a minimal fee to translate the commentary you wish to discuss into more palatable versions. [:D] Example (Above, translated for forum consumption): "White knights are annoying, n'est pas? Have you had any instances where they've caused you unnecessary distress?"

Elisabella -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:55:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Nah because the content of his posts is his choice. It's more like telling someone with a mohawk and a face full of piercings that there are going to be quite a few people who think they look ridiculous and will have no compunction in pointing that out. The content? If the content of his posts is a reflection of who he is, it's no more a "choice" than sexual inclination. unless we're saying it's his choice to be honest or to lie in order to make his posts seem more appealing... And, either way, we're excusing the reactive bias of someone based on the perception of initial bias from the original person. I'm not sure how any of us gets to claim maturity while espousing the "But he did it first!" mentality. Unless he's been speaking of things that involve forcing one's self upon a non-consenting person, I don't see where there's any reason to support aghast reactions. Yes well you are much more open minded than I am, in fact I'd almost say you take openmindedness to a place where its status as a virtue is questioned. If his posts are an honest reflection of who he is, then everyone else's posts showing disgust are an honest reflection of who they are - they can either insult and show their honest reaction or they can feign acceptance (the same 'lie' as you would say he would be living to temper his posts.) I'm not attempting to excuse either form of bias (or rather I'm attempting to justify them both) because it's totally up to osf if he wants to post about how he hates women...and then it's totally up to women if they want to post about how they hate osf. See how that works? [8D]

osf -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:58:46 PM)
actually they dont annoy me, i find it amusing it was just a point of curiosity on my part and wanted input from other men

Elisabella -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:59:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf my biggest problem is typing as ive said no matter what the merits of their argument on line the better typist wins Yes well you can't complain about something that's entirely in your control. The shift key doesn't get pressed by itself. I have a friend who is so severely dyslexic that if he were to use the spellchecker on his posts they would actually become less comprehensible. I wouldn't judge anyone's typing if it were something like that. However simply being too lazy to capitalize or punctuate your sentences is something you can change by spending an average of 30 seconds longer on each post. Possibly less time for you because your posts tend to be short.

EbonyWood -> RE: dangerous men (12/19/2009 11:59:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf as far as im concerned there are too many rushing in to protect adult women that dont need protecting I didnt rush, I sauntered. I will protect these uppity subbies in my own time, godammit! Seriously this is near incoherent, If you have an anti - protectionist stance maybe you need to take it to Politics.

osf -> RE: dangerous men (12/20/2009 12:01:18 AM)
it works better than you imagine or i wouldnt do it

osf -> RE: dangerous men (12/20/2009 12:03:50 AM)
quote: as far as im concerned there are too many rushing in to protect adult women that dont need protecting seems perfectly clear to me in context of the previous posts and even as a stand alone

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/20/2009 12:10:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Yes well you are much more open minded than I am, in fact I'd almost say you take openmindedness to a place where its status as a virtue is questioned. I have never claimed to be virtuous! [8D][;)] quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella If his posts are an honest reflection of who he is, then everyone else's posts showing disgust are an honest reflection of who they are - they can either insult and show their honest reaction or they can feign acceptance (the same 'lie' as you would say he would be living to temper his posts.) Exactly. Fighting fire with fire still means both participants are using fire. quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella I'm not attempting to excuse either form of bias (or rather I'm attempting to justify them both) because it's totally up to osf if he wants to post about how he hates women...and then it's totally up to women if they want to post about how they hate osf. Kind of. The first is a non-specific, broad personal assessment. Frankly, I think it's more of a front in this case. One good woman in his life and he'll likely be singing a different tune. The retaliative hate, though, is specific and (largely) unmerited. I think it's a bit exaggerated for me to get uppity about a hypothetical woman who talks about how all men are pigs to where I feel I have to defend my gender's honor by shooting her down when it's obvious her views are an illogical projection of personal experiences onto every male in existence. quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella See how that works? [8D] Kinda. The "hate all women" comment is a pretty borderline thing that can easily be taken in a more derogatory way (if the word "women" was replaced, say, with an ethnic group). I'm just used to seeing the pronounced dislike of a gender as more of a reflection of personal history rather than nurtured bigotry. I guess it could be either.

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/20/2009 12:12:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EbonyWood Seriously this is near incoherent It's just a rant about white knights. To that extent, I'd agree.

NihilusZero -> RE: dangerous men (12/20/2009 12:13:49 AM)
On a side note, this thread needs cookies. That would fix everything.

osf -> RE: dangerous men (12/20/2009 12:19:14 AM)
the post thats drawing so much attention was probably something on the order of i hate women therefore i want one to abuse without knowing my style of humor it can be misconstrued but then even after i elaborated the hazing continued

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125