RE: A legend returns ... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message


BLoved -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 10:55:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
I am not intolerant of the beliefs of others. I recognize they have the right to believe what they wish, and I defend that right.

...

It is their need to coerce me into agreeing with them that demonstrates their intolerance.


A bit of hypocrisy/double standard now? In the very first post you admit to being opposed to their beliefs and arguing against it.

The others are doing nothing more than opposing yours.


You would have to be deliberately obtuse to overlook the efforts to assasinate my character in this thread.

They have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument in favour of casual bdsm, so they stoop to character assasination.





Raiikun -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 10:59:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved

They have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument in favour of casual bdsm, so they stoop to character assasination.



You have no rational, reasonable arguments against it, so you stoop to logical fallacies, trolling, appeals to emotion, and passive aggressively insulting those who don't agree with you.




EbonyWood -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:00:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
And all those posts challenging me over my beliefs before the thread was moved had nothing to do with this?


Another strawman. She was quite clear in Her words that you breaking the rules in the very first post "set the stage" for the post being moved. She didn't claim it was the sole reason.


In other words, all it took was for me to express my beliefs in my introduction to incite a riot ... and I am responsible for this, not those whose intolerance for my beliefs chose to riot?


Riot? You would think a self professed writer would know the definition of a riot. This is where your editor throws your manuscript back, Bob.
 
" Sorry, we are not publishing Science Fiction at this time..."




antinomy -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:03:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved

quote:

ORIGINAL: antinomy
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
All I have to do to accomplish that is speak up about what I believe. Their intolerance for the beliefs of others does the rest.

Bob, I asked you, back in post 974, to speak to the apparent hypocrisy in your statements about intolerance. Since you posted this again, I'm going to ask you to respond to what I wrote. I'm sure you have heard the old adage of the "pot calling the kettle black"?


I am not intolerant of the beliefs of others. I recognize they have the right to believe what they wish, and I defend that right.

That doesn't require me to be silent about my beliefs, or any aspect of my beliefs. I too have the right to believe what I wish, and the right to express that belief, just as they do.

It is their need to coerce me into agreeing with them that demonstrates their intolerance.


You claim that you recognize their right to believe what they wish, yet you tell them they are wrong and that yours is the only correct and responsible way to practice BDSM or D/s. As I tried to say earlier, there is a distinct difference in saying that something is wrong for you and yours, and saying that it's an absolute- and wrong for everyone else, too. Which is what it sure looks like you have been saying. Edited to add: and that sure sounds like intolerance to me.




LadyPact -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:04:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
They have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument in favour of casual bdsm, so they stoop to character assasination.



Actually, I do.

It happens to be fun.






Rule -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:05:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
In other words, all it took was for me to express my beliefs in my introduction to incite a riot ... and I am responsible for this, not those whose intolerance for my beliefs chose to riot?


Your bombastic use of language and pomposity contributed a fair bit to the riot, and it started with your choice of thread title, legend.

You are not a legend to me: you are someone who produces train wrecks. I bet many contributors to this thread will agree on that with me. I recall the train wreck from your previous appearance, vaguely, but I do.




BLoved -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:07:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
In other words, all it took was for me to express my beliefs in my introduction to incite a riot ... and I am responsible for this, not those whose intolerance for my beliefs chose to riot?


Riot? You would think a self professed writer would know the definition of a riot. This is where your editor throws your manuscript back, Bob.
 
" Sorry, we are not publishing Science Fiction at this time..."


Actually, this is where an editor would say "that is a well-chosen metaphor".

You are not honestly of the opinion that the posters to this thread have demonstrated any degree of maturity. For so many to behave in such a juvenile fashion is certainly reminiscent of a riot where people lose control of their behaviour to become a mob ruled by mob-mentality, and there has been ample evidence of that here.




Raiikun -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:09:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
You are not honestly of the opinion that the posters to this thread have demonstrated any degree of maturity.


I am honestly of the opinion they met with the same maturity you started the thread off with.




BLoved -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:12:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: antinomy
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
quote:

ORIGINAL: antinomy
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
All I have to do to accomplish that is speak up about what I believe. Their intolerance for the beliefs of others does the rest.

Bob, I asked you, back in post 974, to speak to the apparent hypocrisy in your statements about intolerance. Since you posted this again, I'm going to ask you to respond to what I wrote. I'm sure you have heard the old adage of the "pot calling the kettle black"?

I am not intolerant of the beliefs of others. I recognize they have the right to believe what they wish, and I defend that right.

That doesn't require me to be silent about my beliefs, or any aspect of my beliefs. I too have the right to believe what I wish, and the right to express that belief, just as they do.

It is their need to coerce me into agreeing with them that demonstrates their intolerance.

You claim that you recognize their right to believe what they wish, yet you tell them they are wrong and that yours is the only correct and responsible way to practice BDSM or D/s.


I recognize the right of a person to vote for whichever candidate they choose in an election.

That doesn't mean I agree with every choice, or that I must remain silent about the choice I favour, the choice I oppose.

Why should this be any different?

quote:


As I tried to say earlier, there is a distinct difference in saying that something is wrong for you and yours, and saying that it's an absolute- and wrong for everyone else, too.


It happens every time there is an election. Are you saying it is okay for politicians to tell everyone which party/representiative is right for them, and which is wrong, but not okay for me to express my beliefs about what is right and wrong?

In what way is that "tolerant" of the beliefs of others?




alicenwondrland -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:13:24 AM)

quote:

As for alice... put me in the group of people who don't understand or agree with the harping on her gender. Her profile says "Female." I have no interest in seeing her naked or going anywhere near here dainty bits. So the exact nature of her anatomy today, or 20 years ago, is of no consequence to me. I don't care how many people she calls fat, ugly, or old, she offers plenty of words to criticize without having to assault her gender identity. I wish people would reconsider doing so, because it's a rather ugly thing to do. And it's lazy. Plenty of other things to criticize her for before you get to that.


As much as I can appreciate your lack of sexual desire for me, I must say , perhaps everyone I could state my piece here to help clarify where this began, why they are attacking my gender and continue to do so, and why I've called people fat, ugly and old. I do NOT comprehend how this is not obvious to anyone following any of this drama

As for my gender now or 20 years ago being different, it is a funny thing to say considering not only am I 33 but no one believes I am 33. I get carded daily for cigarettes. Whatever.

When I first posted on the Question About Demographic thread a couple weeks ago, after several nice and friendly postings, I was surprised to have been attacked quite harshly by someone who accused me of having insulted "everyone on the board" and lacking "taste, class and intelligence". I replied quite civilly with genuine confusion and by re-clarifying that I was NOT judging anyone or had made any link between negative traits and middle-aged men, but had a valid question. Quite shortly after, I was attacked again unexpectedly by someone who said he "would not be hitting on me" because I was full of  "prejudices and baggage".

Here is evidence of that: http://www.collarchat.com/m_3054016/mpage_1/tm.htm

From this point is just got nasty...You can make your mind up for yourself as to what happened. My feeling was then, as it is now, that people were truly offended (and I *still* dont get how anyone could be THAT insecure) over my avoidance of older men. They lashed out at me and continued to do so, even after establishing that I was new and after a couple pages of the thread that the BDSM age predilections are entirely different than the vanilla world. I had inadvertently stepped on people's toes HOWEVER did realize it and make everyone aware that I had no previous knowledge of this. I tried to remain jovial. There were posters who *continually* pretended to simply not comprehend why I would be attracted only to a male in my own age. I replied eventually by exasperatedly, jestingly, stating "Look all politeness aside, " I am young and hot. I wasnt a man who is young and hot. How hard is that to understand?" But this just exacerbated the attacks. Here, they all began attacking my looks, calling my ugly etc. I believe it was about page 3 or 4 when a male here said "you look like a man". Domiguy as well as several other people all at once started on this tract of calling me ugly and masculine looking- this continued for about 17 pages. I fought back every single post-and would not stop- because I couldn't believe so many people would gang up on one person and wanted to take these predators down. No one should get away with behavior like that. I do NOT post in message boards (this was the first time in my ENTIRE life) and was not used to this sort of vitriol. It ended with my very essence of a human being being called black and empty..something like that, by sexyred1, who started the entire thing and helped keep it going. The mods got involved finally and clsoed the thread. Haha- RIGHT before I posted a page long opus- I was *this close* to having the last say on all of them.

It sort of spiralled downwards from there, into alot of bizarre speculation, rumors, a meme that just won't die...

NOW.

Just one last time I will clarify this. For those of you who are confused or intimidated a bit by the way I act, please think for a minute about the context that I may be attacking these people in- that is, you may have not seen ALL that that person may have said to me. I *rarely* read even the entire page, and *never* read the entire thread. So the way I see it, whenever I'd called some poster "a despiccable hideous hag" for example, or old, fat and ugly it is BECAUSE

1. I have been attacked by like 3 people at once previously- so I am enraged and hurt at this point.
2. This person has attacked my looks, without provocation, before. I am only returning the favor.
3. I think it's only fair to note that there are both men and women in the world who can be quite nasty to people who are significantly more attractive than they are. Ask any women who is attractive, they *will* tell you this. I promise you!!! I get nasty looks all the time by older ugly women when I simply waiting in line at the drug store and have made no eye contact with her until I realize someone is glaring at me. I in fact will bet any single person here, $100 that you will get the same answer if you take a random poll and ask if they feel that other women have not in the past been nasty towards them based on their looks. Or you could also do google reserach if you don't believe me. *sigh* I'd thought it was common knowledge. But here? It's rude to call this out, but let me clarify that I am stating this to give some background to the psychology of what has happened here. Plenty of people on this thread have manipulated things to seem as if somehow it is ME that is some TERRIBLE, GRINDINGLY SHALLOW NAME-CALLING human when I was consistently attacked for NOTHING BUT my looks for 17 pages almost- and in fact, continue to be ( no seriously, get a life!) AND further, I AM ONLY CALLING THEM OUT ON JEALOUSY BEING THE REASON FOR THEIR ABUSE.

So this is the outline of what happened. I encourage anyone to read the thread. That is all I have to say. Good night and good luck.





xxblushesxx -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:15:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx

quote:

ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx

Two and a half years ago you said this: (oh wait...thanks RedMagic for an hour of my life I can't get back...) ok, you said this: "I am confused why so many insist their way is the only way in which to handle death, and that as it was for them, it must be so for me.

I'd have thought those exposed to all the variations of lifestyle and relationship such as exists under the BDSM umbrella would see the dangers in declaring "One True Way" for dealing with death.

It would seem there are actually very few who understand that."


Insert relationships for the word death, and you'll have answered your own argument(s).

Can you articulate your answer (specific answer not apples and oranges) to the above? If you could do so, reasonably and without dissembling, perhaps we could come to an understanding.


I would like a thoughtful reply to this question, please.

Thank you.




Whiplashsmile4 -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:20:07 AM)

WARNING: The following game ain't for everybody, nor is it intended for casual play.






antinomy -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:20:35 AM)

No, Bob, I am NOT saying that at all. I think I was pretty clear in my assertation that I was cool with your beliefs, and with you posting them. I don't think the majority of the posters have an issue with that, either. The issue at hand has become the way you have tried to state your opinions and personal beliefs as facts. Now, they may be facts, as they apply to YOUR life- but, and this is a pretty big but, if they don't apply to everyone else, they are not facts for them. We all have things we believe in. If we didn't, this thread would have died a long time ago. What you have been doing though is bemoaning that other people vocally disagree with you- and then you seem to take it personally. You think there is a lynch mob out there to get you, following you from site to site, because your truth is so threatening to them. When really, it's not, because simply put- it's not their truth, and never will be.




EbonyWood -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:20:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood
quote:

ORIGINAL: BLoved
In other words, all it took was for me to express my beliefs in my introduction to incite a riot ... and I am responsible for this, not those whose intolerance for my beliefs chose to riot?


Riot? You would think a self professed writer would know the definition of a riot. This is where your editor throws your manuscript back, Bob.
 
" Sorry, we are not publishing Science Fiction at this time..."


Actually, this is where an editor would say "that is a well-chosen metaphor".

You are not honestly of the opinion that the posters to this thread have demonstrated any degree of maturity. For so many to behave in such a juvenile fashion is certainly reminiscent of a riot where people lose control of their behaviour to become a mob ruled by mob-mentality, and there has been ample evidence of that here.


Telling me my opinion now, Bob? I see that the preacher analogy was correct.
 
It sucks to have a disbelieving congregation, huh?
 
Plus, watch the typos and missed punctuation. You are starting to rage. It's immature.
 




BLoved -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:22:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx
quote:

ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx
quote:

ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx
Two and a half years ago you said this: (oh wait...thanks RedMagic for an hour of my life I can't get back...) ok, you said this: "I am confused why so many insist their way is the only way in which to handle death, and that as it was for them, it must be so for me.

I'd have thought those exposed to all the variations of lifestyle and relationship such as exists under the BDSM umbrella would see the dangers in declaring "One True Way" for dealing with death.

It would seem there are actually very few who understand that."


Insert relationships for the word death, and you'll have answered your own argument(s).

Can you articulate your answer (specific answer not apples and oranges) to the above? If you could do so, reasonably and without dissembling, perhaps we could come to an understanding.


I would like a thoughtful reply to this question, please.

Thank you.


Page number?




thishereboi -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:24:18 AM)

quote:

They have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument in favour of casual bdsm, so they stoop to character assasination.


And you have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument against it.  All you have it your opinion and based on your previous posts, I doubt you understand what casual play is. If you did, you wouldn't bring up bs about having sex with strangers. Some people play and there is no sex involved.




BLoved -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:24:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

WARNING: The following game ain't for everybody, nor is it intended for casual play.

[image]local://upfiles/718516/82F1C98A650D41929504023E589E9FC5.jpg[/image]



~smile~

Cute. My friends will get a kick out of it.




Raiikun -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:26:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

They have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument in favour of casual bdsm, so they stoop to character assasination.


And you have no rational, reasonable, ethical argument against it.  All you have it your opinion and based on your previous posts, I doubt you understand what casual play is. If you did, you wouldn't bring up bs about having sex with strangers. Some people play and there is no sex involved.



Nor does casual BDSM play have to be with strangers either. My limited casual play was with someone I knew for months before we played.




Whiplashsmile4 -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:29:39 AM)


WARNING: The following game ain't for everybody, nor is it intended for casual play.

[image]local://upfiles/718516/E158926C22BA4253AFAD1EBB791419D4.jpg[/image]


* revised cover




BLoved -> RE: A legend returns ... (2/19/2010 11:31:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: antinomy
No, Bob, I am NOT saying that at all. I think I was pretty clear in my assertation that I was cool with your beliefs, and with you posting them. I don't think the majority of the posters have an issue with that, either. The issue at hand has become the way you have tried to state your opinions and personal beliefs as facts. Now, they may be facts, as they apply to YOUR life- but, and this is a pretty big but, if they don't apply to everyone else, they are not facts for them. We all have things we believe in. If we didn't, this thread would have died a long time ago. What you have been doing though is bemoaning that other people vocally disagree with you- and then you seem to take it personally. You think there is a lynch mob out there to get you, following you from site to site, because your truth is so threatening to them. When really, it's not, because simply put- it's not their truth, and never will be.


There are those who believe in silencing someone who disagrees with them, refuses to acknowledge their authority on the subject. Such individuals are not particular in how they get what they want. Freedom of belief, freedom of expression doesn't mean anything to them.

That is why I was banned. That is why there is so much character assasination in this thread.

Reasonable debate I welcome and can handle. They've got nothing to offer, so they resort to character assasination.

For example:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
You use an alleged sick child to derive sympathy. You create a wife character who you represent to have 'lovingly' nailed her tits to a board. Of course now she's dead, looking for some "woe is me" reaction. The intent is to point out that you are a masochist. A bratty attention whore at that who, when seeing attention wane, posts some ridiculous manifesto, most likely stolen from another source, to attract more cyber beatings.




Page: <<   < prev  53 54 [55] 56 57   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875