Spoiler: show
Kate wrote:I want to take some public responsibility for that, Jim, since you seem to be particularly mad at Tess but I think I'm the one who originally mentioned that because I am the one who followed Noodle on G+ for awhile for a few reasons (I often agree with her, I like her art, and I think she's funny and clever) and that is what I thought I saw in her posts there. I could dig back for it, but it is a daunting task, I have a baby to take care of who is sick and I'm also sick right now. And frankly I can't think of a minute in my life where I have the space to do that unless it's of vital importance. And it's not that you're not important to me, but I have a strong feeling that even if I found it you still wouldn't think that excuses what you see as an insult. I don't want you to be mad at Tess for something that I originally said.
That was a good part of why this made me so uncomfortable; I genuinely believed Noodle had identified as such and people saying that was inherently a bad thing upset me. I am relieved that I am mistaken, because public opinion seems to be it's okay to say that anyone who identifies as alt-right is bad so it's obviously an insult. And I still do not agree with that.
ETA: and most importantly, I am sorry first of all for apparently making the mistake in how I read her posts, and secondly for any hurt that I have caused with that.
Kate wrote:ETA: and most importantly, I am sorry first of all for apparently making the mistake in how I read her posts, and secondly for any hurt that I have caused with that.
Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:I, for one, don't accept your apology. I think it's horrible that you might have gotten something wrong. Mistakes never happen, only lies, insults, and misdirections. Unless we're suggesting that black people are inherently violent, gay people have a pedophile problem, or some other stereotyped group fits its stereotype. I think it's way less likely for conversations to be offensive if we just stick to those kinds of issues because people never distort facts or try to hide horrible views in prettier-sounding language during those exchanges. I also think cmsellers owes me (yes, me specifically) an apology for possibly making a mistake about someone's political views. That's not something lighthearted like rape or racism, and you should have known how offended people would get if you got that detail wrong. Now, can we get back to whether Tess defends pedophilia? I heard that a reliable source said something about that.
Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!
skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!
Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
DoglovingJim wrote:Kate wrote:ETA: and most importantly, I am sorry first of all for apparently making the mistake in how I read her posts, and secondly for any hurt that I have caused with that.
You have no reason to apologize Kate, hopefully you and your child get better. And I'm not mad at Tess, just a bit annoyed that she wanted to justify CMSsellers claim that Noodle-Fox was Alt-Right when she never said no such thing herself. Once upon a time I had to deal with people trying to put words in my mouth that I never said, and as a result I spent a long time as a loner so this was where I dug my trench. I wouldn't just let it go by, it felt wrong to me inside.
And regardless Kate, like you said you did not view Alt-Right as an insult even though others including Noodle-Fox could so it was simply an honest mistake. You didn't realise it'd turn into this, it wasn't intentional.
DoglovingJim wrote:Now people like Mr. Fudge however seem to once more trying to turn this into something it isn't, for your information sir I do not think that Tess is defending pedophilia.
As made evident I view that everyone was misinterpreting everyone but nobody gave Noodle-Fox a chance, and now she is gone.
The fact that now we'd have to attach labels to people, exaggerate things and in your case be really sarcastic to try and downgrade any potential deferring perspectives I feel that in this case we did not conduct ourselves as welcoming.
We are starting to become an in-group of ideals and to be quite honest those of differing views appear to be reluctant to express those views, and what happened with Noodle-Fox in that she eventually was basically turned into some homophobic and trans-phobic Alt-Right fanatic when she is none of those things (she certainly didn't demonstrate any in her comments) isn't helping.
Tesseracts wrote:DoglovingJim wrote:Kate wrote:ETA: and most importantly, I am sorry first of all for apparently making the mistake in how I read her posts, and secondly for any hurt that I have caused with that.
You have no reason to apologize Kate, hopefully you and your child get better. And I'm not mad at Tess, just a bit annoyed that she wanted to justify CMSsellers claim that Noodle-Fox was Alt-Right when she never said no such thing herself. Once upon a time I had to deal with people trying to put words in my mouth that I never said, and as a result I spent a long time as a loner so this was where I dug my trench. I wouldn't just let it go by, it felt wrong to me inside.
And regardless Kate, like you said you did not view Alt-Right as an insult even though others including Noodle-Fox could so it was simply an honest mistake. You didn't realise it'd turn into this, it wasn't intentional.
Kate's opinion on this subject is exactly the same as mine, and as Kate said I was repeating something she originally said. It is obvious some of you have a problem with me and certain others that goes deeper than this one issue.
Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:DoglovingJim wrote:Now people like Mr. Fudge however seem to once more trying to turn this into something it isn't, for your information sir I do not think that Tess is defending pedophilia.
For your information, I never said or thought you did. That satement was not directed at you. But someone did accuse Tess of defending pedophilia. I think that accusation was made in bad faith, but I also realize I could be wrong.
Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:As made evident I view that everyone was misinterpreting everyone but nobody gave Noodle-Fox a chance, and now she is gone.
I don't think she wasn't given a chance to clarify herself. I almost feel like we didn't read the same exchanges. Then again, maybe we just interpreted them differently. Also, she wasn't banned, so she's gone by choice.
Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:The fact that now we'd have to attach labels to people, exaggerate things and in your case be really sarcastic to try and downgrade any potential deferring perspectives I feel that in this case we did not conduct ourselves as welcoming.
I was being more facetious than sarcastic. I find this focus on cmsellers' post absurd by this point and made an absurd post reflecting that while also pointing out that in my view, the nature of these conversations is such that some people will get offended. Moreover, I wanted to indirectly point out that sometimes people are not entirely honest (sometimes even with themselves) about their views, especially if they're considered offensive. That's not directed at anyone in particular. I just think that's true.
Also, I find it incredibly unwelcoming to portray being alt-right as an insult, not because I identify as such but because it implies such people are not welcome here. I find it unwelcoming to call someone a liar or claim they were exaggerating for interpreting a series of words that could, in my view, actually be summarized in the apparently offensive way that they were. It's one thing to disagree, another to attribute ill-intent on the basis of having a different interpretation of those specific words.
Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:DoglovingJim wrote:We are starting to become an in-group of ideals and to be quite honest those of differing views appear to be reluctant to express those views, and what happened with Noodle-Fox in that she eventually was basically turned into some homophobic and trans-phobic Alt-Right fanatic when she is none of those things (she certainly didn't demonstrate any in her comments) isn't helping.
Really? So this whole back-and-forth didn't demonstrate that people are allowed to disagree? Do we get to argue that transpeople are unqualified for the military because they don't have the mental stability and "mutilate" themselves without being able to suggest that such a position sounds or might be transphobic? Is the problem that a generally unpopular view got challanged? I really don't get what the argument is here. Not everyone said one thing about anyone. And I find it troubling that only certain people seem to be getting the benefit of the doubt.
Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!
skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!
Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
Randy Marsh wrote:Senators, I know it is not normally considered "American" to ban words. But there is one slur that has caused so much damage that we believe it should finally be made illegal. I'm talking, of course, about the term "nigger guy".
DoglovingJim wrote:Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:DoglovingJim wrote:Now people like Mr. Fudge however seem to once more trying to turn this into something it isn't, for your information sir I do not think that Tess is defending pedophilia.
For your information, I never said or thought you did. That satement was not directed at you. But someone did accuse Tess of defending pedophilia. I think that accusation was made in bad faith, but I also realize I could be wrong.
Forgive me for my error, I assumed it was from the way you responded.
I do attribute ill-intent on his claims...
And from what I read Noodle-Fox disagreed with transgendered people joining the military on the basis of several things such as the fact that according to her and the study she readthey are significantly more likely to be suicidal and she feels that the military should consist of the best of the best, a view like that doesn't imply she irrationally fears or hates transgendered people and is therefore transphobic.
Next you'll be saying that she is a misogynist since she thought that women shouldn't have easier-passing requirements to men and do the same thing, that if they aren't as fit (as she says they are biologically not as fit as men) than they shouldn't be allowed to enlist.
Zevran wrote:Magic can kill. Knives can kill. Even small children launched at great speeds can kill.
DoglovingJim wrote:And from what I read Noodle-Fox disagreed with transgendered people joining the military on the basis of several things such as the fact that according to her and the study she readthey are significantly more likely to be suicidal and she feels that the military should consist of the best of the best, a view like that doesn't imply she irrationally fears or hates transgendered people and is therefore transphobic.
gisambards wrote:DoglovingJim wrote:And from what I read Noodle-Fox disagreed with transgendered people joining the military on the basis of several things such as the fact that according to her and the study she readthey are significantly more likely to be suicidal and she feels that the military should consist of the best of the best, a view like that doesn't imply she irrationally fears or hates transgendered people and is therefore transphobic.
This isn't giving Noodle the benefit of the doubt, this is bending yourself over backwards to defend her. You have intentionally omitted vast swathes of her argument to avoid the specific things that I said at the time and have said more recently I took issue with, and left only the things no-one ever said were transphobic.
Frankly, the claim Noodle never had the benefit of the doubt is ridiculous. She did. She was not banned. No-one denied her the opportunity to defend herself. Multiple people tried to debate things with her, but she never actually wanted to. Now I'm sure the "Let's Give Noodle (but no-one else) The Benefit Of The Doubt" brigade will still insist that me suggesting there might be some prejudice to her argument was such an egregious insult that it justifies her refusal to engage in debate with anyone, but in actuality that's bullshit. Most of us here on this site who discuss politics have had to put up with have had our views attacked at some point, but you can't just insult everyone and refuse to engage in debate if you want that to change.
The fact is, this bizarre insistence we give Noodle, of all people, "the benefit of the doubt" (i.e. never criticise them) is just insulting. It's insulting to the right-wing users here who don't feel the need to go around insulting people in place of arguments and having tantrums whenever they're disagreed with, because it's acting like Noodle should be considered an average user of that type. It's insulting to those of us who actually tried to engage with Noodle at the time, because it's painting us as people who just insult people we don't like. And frankly it's insulting to the people Noodle was openly bigoted towards, because of the extent to which you're having to either ignore or dismiss genuinely prejudiced comments she made to make those of us who challenged them out to be the bad guys.
Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!
skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!
Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
DoglovingJim wrote:FunwithMrFudge wrote:I find it troubling that only certain people seem to be getting the benefit of the doubt.
We certainly are in agreement with the bolded text, shame Noodle-Fox didn't get any.
DoglovingJim wrote:Forgive me for my error, I assumed it was from the way you responded.
DoglovingJim wrote:Fair enough, you view peoples frustration over CMSellers labeling of Noodle-Fox as crazy.
DoglovingJim wrote:I do attribute ill-intent on his claims that Noodle-Fox was such, giving people labels that they don't want is wrong no matter what. CMSellers interpreted the possibility of Noodle-Fox claiming that Hollywood had a gay pedophile problem (according to you guys) as meaning that she is Alt-Right and feels that liberals are pedophiles, yep that's not a reach. He could have made his thread without using Noodle-Fox, as has been agreed upon by many.
DoglovingJim wrote:And considering the whole thread was essentially a mockery of the Alt-Right by saying that they have an obsession with declaring their opponents pedophiles, backed up on the basis of a few anecdotes and one news-site. I don't think there is any intention for this forum to be welcoming to the Alt-Right, and it's not because of people like me who think that it's wrong to give people labels when they no longer are with us and therefore cannot call us out on our BS.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests