Well, naturally he rubbished them, because he's talking about tendencies and overall statistics - averages. Does the average woman beat the average man? Not, "can we find one?" But he has been given examples (by me) of sports which women seem to overall or on average tend to do better than men. I'm going through the posts here to see what he's done with that information.pErvinalia wrote:Are you saying that it would help you find more role models (which must be "heroic") in your life? I call bullshit, if that's the case. You've been offered a number of individual women that dominate men, and you rubbished those replies.
Women on top
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Not sure why you feel you have a right to make such demands, when you rarely respond in kind.pErvinalia wrote:You still haven't answered the question.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Oh, also - here he did answer your question of why he wants to know. So, you can stop repeating your statement that he is avoiding the question. He gave you his answer. You may not like it, but he did answer.Cunt wrote:Because it would be heroic.
But go on insulting me! I see you even mastered an emoticon :yay:
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 60733
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
He seemed to imply that the reason he wants evidence is so that he can get some more women role models. If that's the case, then individual women champions would meet that requirement. The fact that he rubbished those replies pointing out individual women who excel(led) would suggest that he isn't interested in finding women role models. So without him providing a cogent explanation for why he wants this evidence, I am (and I'm pretty sure others are) going to fall back to the most obvious reason - bigotry.Forty Two wrote:Well, naturally he rubbished them, because he's talking about tendencies and overall statistics - averages. Does the average woman beat the average man? Not, "can we find one?" But he has been given examples (by me) of sports which women seem to overall or on average tend to do better than men. I'm going through the posts here to see what he's done with that information.pErvinalia wrote:Are you saying that it would help you find more role models (which must be "heroic") in your life? I call bullshit, if that's the case. You've been offered a number of individual women that dominate men, and you rubbished those replies.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 60733
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Bullshit. You know very well why I choose to not answer some of your and Cunt's questions. I don't respect dishonesty. You need to start dealing with this fact, snowflake.Forty Two wrote:Not sure why you feel you have a right to make such demands, when you rarely respond in kind.pErvinalia wrote:You still haven't answered the question.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 60733
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
FFS, can you not follow the flow of the argument? I have pointed out why this makes no sense. And when I did, he didn't seek to clarify his position or correct me. He reverted to his usual trolling. You are having a bad couple of days of parsing arguments and performing logic. Did you eat too much chocolate at easter?Forty Two wrote:Oh, also - here he did answer your question of why he wants to know. So, you can stop repeating your statement that he is avoiding the question. He gave you his answer. You may not like it, but he did answer.Cunt wrote:Because it would be heroic.
But go on insulting me! I see you even mastered an emoticon :yay:

Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
The ones not debating or discussing this controversial topic civilly are persons other than Cunt.Sean Hayden wrote:You're full of shit 42. Why even pretend that what we have here is an attempt at a debate over controversial topics in the same vein as Oxford Union's debate? Anyone can go to Youtube to look that up btw.
So what? Lots of people creat lots of threads that other people think are shitty. There is nothing wrong with discussing shitty topics, making shitty jokes, pushing the line of political correctness, or discussing controversial topics while harboring improper motivations. That doesn't mean the person creating a thread is open to having people be shitty to him or her personally right back.Sean Hayden wrote: The OP was shitty.
Someone may create a thread that is anticapitalist, for example, and others may think that the OP harbors some shitty anti-white motivation -- attacking "whiteness" -- and they may feel that to be a "shitty" type of post. That does not mean that the person creating the OP is now fair game to be namecalled and attacked personally, and it doesn't mean that those who don't want to discuss the topic should derail the thread and turn it into an endless discussion about the "real" purpose and motivation for the person creating the thread.
Honestly, this is a few people who think they own Rationalia or constitute the official "we" of this forum deciding that they get to badger and personally attack someone with impunity because they think he harbors thoughts and ideas they don't like, and because he's created a thread about a topic of which they don't approve.
Sure, as long as it's not a personal attack or violation of the play nice rule. Then it's not fine.Sean Hayden wrote:
Responding to it with sarcasm and ridicule is fine.
Sure, and sometimes they are. If they're not breaking the rules, what business is it of yours? If they start thread about whether people with red hair are human, does that mean that they are fair game for personal attacks? Or, can you just be grown up enough to live and let live and just participate in the threads you find entertaining?Sean Hayden wrote: Unfortunately, assholes of a certain bent nearly always fall back to "but I'm just trying to have a rational discussion!"
This is something I simply cannot understand. What in the world is the fascination with whether a person is asking a question with the right motive behind it? It's so often the case around here that a few folks get constantly consumed by the issue of whether someone who said the "sky is blue" said so with the right motivation or intent. The reality is, what Cunt wrote to start the OP was perfectly fine. Even if he's a died-in-the-wool evil-doer, who thinks climate change is overblown, opposes affirmative action, and insists there are only two genders, that doesn't make his OP improper.Sean Hayden wrote: despite their original comments suggesting otherwise.
Here on these boards there have been some really controversial topics discussed. There have been some really mean threads created too, by some of the people in the group who are attacking Cunt here, some even focusing on being "shitty" to certain other members. The reality is that a few people here think they are above the rules, because they aren't shitty, and they seek to impose their own brand of forum justice on the shitty people.
Maybe I think someone here is shitty (not you). Do I get to impose my brand of forum justice on him? Do I get to "be shitty right back at him?" Is that productive? Is that reasonable? Or, isn't the intent of the forum rules that people should post whatever they want as long as they are in the rules, that people would participate in threads that interest them and entertain them, and that people can have good fun without MAKING IT PERSONAL and PERSONALLY ATTACKING those that they think are "shitty?"
So what if they are? If they're not being shitty to you or another member, then there is nothing against the rules here about being a shitty person or holding shitty opinions. Like I said, some people here that are doing the badgering and bleating on this thread harbor some ideas I think are really shitty. Do I get to retaliate? Or, is it only some people who really know what the real shittiness is that get to do the retaliation against the shitty people? Who are the shittiness police here? Or, do some folks here think there is some form objective shittiness that is inarguably shitty?Sean Hayden wrote: Hell, sometimes the asshole even acknowledges or hints at their knowingly being shitty in their opening comments.
Dude - he created a thread looking to discuss whether there were sports or other endeavors in which women overall or on average excelled over men. This is not an evil topic. What the fuck has happened in the world that something so tame as that is engendering this kind of response. You'd think the guy created a thread suggesting the relative merits of diddling toddlers.Sean Hayden wrote: But then, as if they've lost all sense, they try to convince everyone else that they're just being emotional. How can anything difficult be discussed when everyone's so emotional? We're missing so much important rational debate by being such irrational progressives!
Or focus on exactly what he said, rather than whatever you might have inferred he "really meant" by what he said.Sean Hayden wrote:
Look, forget what I said, or rather how I said it. I'm trying to have a rational discussion here. So yeah, I said that. Yeah, I knew it would piss you off. But let's focus on what I meant to say, what this discussion could lead to.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 60733
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
You really have become the biggest whiner and tone policeman on these boards. You don't seem to understand, though, that you have no standing here. Virtually no one respects you. If I was you I'd concentrate on improving your image here than constantly tone policing threads and other posters.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Whether his answer makes sense is a different question from whether he answered. He did answer, so you can stop saying he didn't.pErvinalia wrote:FFS, can you not follow the flow of the argument? I have pointed out why this makes no sense. And when I did, he didn't seek to clarify his position or correct me. He reverted to his usual trolling. You are having a bad couple of days of parsing arguments and performing logic. Did you eat too much chocolate at easter?Forty Two wrote:Oh, also - here he did answer your question of why he wants to know. So, you can stop repeating your statement that he is avoiding the question. He gave you his answer. You may not like it, but he did answer.Cunt wrote:Because it would be heroic.
But go on insulting me! I see you even mastered an emoticon :yay:
Trolling? That's what you're doing, pErvin. That's what you "usually" do.
You "pointed out why HIS ANSWER makes no sense." Great. His answer. So, it's you that can't follow the flow of the argument. You said he didn't answer, when he did. When I "pointed that out to you" your response was that well, yeah, he did answer, but you argued that his answer made no sense, and he "refused to clarify" it for you.
So, when someone refuses to clarify their answer to a question, is that the same thing as never having answered the question to begin with?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Looking at this thread, you have the gall to suggest that I am the tone policeman?pErvinalia wrote:You really have become the biggest whiner and tone policeman on these boards. You don't seem to understand, though, that you have no standing here. Virtually no one respects you. If I was you I'd concentrate on improving your image here than constantly tone policing threads and other posters.
Man you and a couple others have no self-awareness.
And, if you knew what people really think of you, you'd be rather embarrassed.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
yes, officer, police the thread well....undertake your investigation into the true motivation for the thread topic, and then punish the wrongdoers.pErvinalia wrote:He seemed to imply that the reason he wants evidence is so that he can get some more women role models. If that's the case, then individual women champions would meet that requirement. The fact that he rubbished those replies pointing out individual women who excel(led) would suggest that he isn't interested in finding women role models. So without him providing a cogent explanation for why he wants this evidence, I am (and I'm pretty sure others are) going to fall back to the most obvious reason - bigotry.Forty Two wrote:Well, naturally he rubbished them, because he's talking about tendencies and overall statistics - averages. Does the average woman beat the average man? Not, "can we find one?" But he has been given examples (by me) of sports which women seem to overall or on average tend to do better than men. I'm going through the posts here to see what he's done with that information.pErvinalia wrote:Are you saying that it would help you find more role models (which must be "heroic") in your life? I call bullshit, if that's the case. You've been offered a number of individual women that dominate men, and you rubbished those replies.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 60733
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Spectacular levels of equivocation there. I'd expect nothing less, of course. He has avoided answering the question, posed by multiple people including you. He gave a vague hint at what the answer might have been, but it makes no sense, and he refused to clarify after that. You can equivocate as much as you want, but these are the facts of the thread that everyone can read.Forty Two wrote:Whether his answer makes sense is a different question from whether he answered. He did answer, so you can stop saying he didn't.pErvinalia wrote:FFS, can you not follow the flow of the argument? I have pointed out why this makes no sense. And when I did, he didn't seek to clarify his position or correct me. He reverted to his usual trolling. You are having a bad couple of days of parsing arguments and performing logic. Did you eat too much chocolate at easter?Forty Two wrote:Oh, also - here he did answer your question of why he wants to know. So, you can stop repeating your statement that he is avoiding the question. He gave you his answer. You may not like it, but he did answer.Cunt wrote:Because it would be heroic.
But go on insulting me! I see you even mastered an emoticon :yay:
Trolling? That's what you're doing, pErvin. That's what you "usually" do.
You "pointed out why HIS ANSWER makes no sense." Great. His answer. So, it's you that can't follow the flow of the argument. You said he didn't answer, when he did. When I "pointed that out to you" your response was that well, yeah, he did answer, but you argued that his answer made no sense, and he "refused to clarify" it for you.
So, when someone refuses to clarify their answer to a question, is that the same thing as never having answered the question to begin with?
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
pErvinalia wrote:I don't respect dishonesty.Forty Two wrote:Not sure why you feel you have a right to make such demands, when you rarely respond in kind.pErvinalia wrote:You still haven't answered the question.
Exactly, you have no self-respect.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 60733
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
Yes I do. You've now spent pages telling us how we should be addressing this and similar questions. And you've been increasingly doing this for the last 6 months or so. You badly need to work on your own posting before you worry about what others are posting.Forty Two wrote:Looking at this thread, you have the gall to suggest that I am the tone policeman?pErvinalia wrote:You really have become the biggest whiner and tone policeman on these boards. You don't seem to understand, though, that you have no standing here. Virtually no one respects you. If I was you I'd concentrate on improving your image here than constantly tone policing threads and other posters.
This is why you are so clueless. I know exactly what people think of me. YOU however, seem to have no understanding of how widely you are ridiculed on these boards. And I don't mean in private messages. I mean in thread after thread after thread. Why do you think it is that everyone ridicules you so much? I guess we all could be really mean people, like you constantly accuse me of being (waaah, do you need a safe space?), but the reality is that the rest of us manage to get along reasonably well with each other. So the common problem here is YOU. You get ridiculed by pretty much everyone, because pretty much everyone thinks you are giant joke. And really, it's not surprising that you can't see what's written right in front of your face, given your woeful interpretation of what other people (including journalists not on this board) mean in their writings. If I'm remembering correctly, you are a first generation immigrant, right? How many years have you been speaking/writing English?Man you and a couple others have no self-awareness.
And, if you knew what people really think of you, you'd be rather embarrassed.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Women on top
No, YOU and some others have spent pages telling others what questions are legitimate to be posed when people have given or assumed motivations and purposes for creating the threads. And you've spent pages personally attacking the creater of the thread because of it -- getting shitty to him in return for his shitty OP. And you've been doing this consistently. You've not even addressed the question - you've addressed Cunt's alleged reason, motive or purpose for posing the question.pErvinalia wrote:Yes I do. You've now spent pages telling us how we should be addressing this and similar questions. And you've been increasingly doing this for the last 6 months or so. You badly need to work on your own posting before you worry about what others are posting.Forty Two wrote:Looking at this thread, you have the gall to suggest that I am the tone policeman?pErvinalia wrote:You really have become the biggest whiner and tone policeman on these boards. You don't seem to understand, though, that you have no standing here. Virtually no one respects you. If I was you I'd concentrate on improving your image here than constantly tone policing threads and other posters.
Cunt is part of the "us," isn't he? I'm not telling you how to address an issue. I'm telling you to stop violating the rules by personally attacking a person who created a thread that is well-within the rules and allowable content on this forum.
Question which you will not answer, I'm sure: Who do you think "us" is when you used that word as bolded above.
Are you going to avoid the question? Naturally, you will.
Most think you're a troll, and a bit looney, and a tad scary, if you don't take your medicine.pErvinalia wrote:This is why you are so clueless. I know exactly what people think of me.Man you and a couple others have no self-awareness.
And, if you knew what people really think of you, you'd be rather embarrassed.
I'm not too worried about it. The ones that ridicule me are the ones that are like you. And your opinion means less than nothing, because you are self-righteous and not particularly bright.pErvinalia wrote: YOU however, seem to have no understanding of how widely you are ridiculed on these boards.
Everyone? How many, really? The ones that know how to put a thought together aren't in that group.pErvinalia wrote: And I don't mean in private messages. I mean in thread after thread after thread. Why do you think it is that everyone ridicules you so much?
You hardly get along with anyone. Most people avoid you. And, the only ones you get along with openly are those who you think agree with you. I've seen you turn on a dime, and someone who was normally in your good graces was subject to your bullshit trolling and attacks, just because on a given issue they opposed your position. You're such a self-righteous moralizer that you brook no dissent. People either agree with you, or they're the enemy.pErvinalia wrote: I guess we all could really mean people, like you constantly accuse me of being (waaah, do you need a safe space?), but the reality is that the rest of us manage to get along reasonably well with each other.
Actually it's you, and if you look at thread after thread that gets ruined like this - diverted into rants about people being bigots and the true motivation of others - and into derails that are off topic, riddled with personal attacks. It's almost always you at the center of it. You've assigned yourself the role of thread policeman, which is why it's hilarious to see you attacking me as some sort of tone police. I guess you love tone police, and topic police, and motivation police, and righteousness police, as long as you're the self-appointed sheriff.pErvinalia wrote: So the common problem here is YOU.
Go ahead and link to that. Let's see who the scholars are that are the "pretty much everyone" that ridicule me.pErvinalia wrote: You get ridiculed by pretty much everyone,
Awesome. You should hear what they have to say about you. You'd think joke was a huge compliment.pErvinalia wrote: because pretty much everyone thinks you are giant joke.
Oi. Carry on, Officer pErvin. Carry on.pErvinalia wrote: And really, it's not surprising that you can't see what's written write in front of your face, given your woeful interpretation of what other people (including journalists not on this board) mean in their writings. If I'm remembering correctly, you are a first generation immigrant, right? How many years have you been speaking/writing English?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests