Am I a man or a woman?

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Locked
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Re:

Post by ForCruxSake »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
henry quirk wrote:"Diversity'. Another perfectly useful word that has been press-ganged into the dictionary of political correctness."

Exactly.
The same goes for 'multiculturalism'--another addition to the PC dictionary. Different cultures don't mix and never will, which is why you find so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas. You don't often find Chinese in Somalian gangs, or vice versa.
I'm not sure what part of the world you live in but I'm in a part of London that's fairly mixed. Those that want to stick to their culture do, those that don't mix. You need only look to your average central London comprehensive school to see that. It's a big melting pot. Something for everyone. Generally people get on... if only with their own lives. Crimes are not deemed 'multicultural' so much as socio-economic. It's poverty, lack of income, feeling disadvantaged that gives rise to crime... Not culture. There are as many poor white folks as disadvantaged immigrants... and guess what?!! They commit crimes, too! It seems that the biggest criminals here, in the last decade, have been the politicians or News International cronies!

I think there are many people here who would rather be 'politically correct' than an aggressive bully who feels the the need to impress on others that they are somehow better than them.

Whatever you think of how others appropriate language... and that's all it is at the end if the day: how YOU think others appropriate language, when it doesn't fit in with how YOU would have everyone else speak... if it's to the benefit, or defence, of others, who may be at a disadvantage, it's not all bad. For all it's misdirected liberal bias, 'political correctness' still has a heart that beats In the interests of the socially disadvantaged.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Re:

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
henry quirk wrote:"Diversity'. Another perfectly useful word that has been press-ganged into the dictionary of political correctness."

Exactly.
The same goes for 'multiculturalism'--another addition to the PC dictionary. Different cultures don't mix and never will, which is why you find so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas. You don't often find Chinese in Somalian gangs, or vice versa.
I'm not sure what part of the world you live in but I'm in a part of London that's fairly mixed. Those that want to stick to their culture do, those that don't mix. You need only look to your average central London comprehensive school to see that. It's a big melting pot. Something for everyone. Generally people get on... if only with their own lives. Crimes are not deemed 'multicultural' so much as socio-economic. It's poverty, lack of income, feeling disadvantaged that gives rise to crime... Not culture. There are as many poor white folks as disadvantaged immigrants... and guess what?!! They commit crimes, too! It seems that the biggest criminals here, in the last decade, have been the politicians or News International cronies!

I think there are many people here who would rather be 'politically correct' than an aggressive bully who feels the the need to impress on others that they are somehow better than them.

Whatever you think of how others appropriate language... and that's all it is at the end if the day: how YOU think others appropriate language, when it doesn't fit in with how YOU would have everyone else speak... if it's to the benefit, or defence, of others, who may be at a disadvantage, it's not all bad. For all it's misdirected liberal bias, 'political correctness' still has a heart that beats In the interests of the socially disadvantaged.
I don't think I mentioned 'white folks'. Where did I say they don't commit crimes? Schools are a rather silly example. It's a tiny, closed environment. Do you expect blood-baths at every school? As it is, the better off invariably flock to the 'reputable schools'--and we all know what THAT means. There are poor in every country. Always have been. Here, one murder in a year used to make headlines. Now it's an everyday occurrence. And it is possible to have a 'heart that beats in the interests of the socially disadvantaged' without being a fanatical, 'racism hidden in every word' PC twat.
As for the rest of your nonsense, you might try looking in the mirror. I looked over our exchanges and you aren't exactly 'lily white'. In fact you have been the aggressor in most of your exchanges on here. I'm sorry that you feel 'bullied' when you feel you are losing, but that's your problem--not mine.
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by ForCruxSake »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: The same goes for 'multiculturalism'--another addition to the PC dictionary. Different cultures don't mix and never will, which is why you find so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas. You don't often find Chinese in Somalian gangs, or vice versa.
I'm not sure what part of the world you live in but I'm in a part of London that's fairly mixed. Those that want to stick to their culture do, those that don't mix. You need only look to your average central London comprehensive school to see that. It's a big melting pot. Something for everyone. Generally people get on... if only with their own lives. Crimes are not deemed 'multicultural' so much as socio-economic. It's poverty, lack of income, feeling disadvantaged that gives rise to crime... Not culture. There are as many poor white folks as disadvantaged immigrants... and guess what?!! They commit crimes, too! It seems that the biggest criminals here, in the last decade, have been the politicians or News International cronies!

I think there are many people here who would rather be 'politically correct' than an aggressive bully who feels the the need to impress on others that they are somehow better than them.

Whatever you think of how others appropriate language... and that's all it is at the end if the day: how YOU think others appropriate language, when it doesn't fit in with how YOU would have everyone else speak... if it's to the benefit, or defence, of others, who may be at a disadvantage, it's not all bad. For all it's misdirected liberal bias, 'political correctness' still has a heart that beats In the interests of the socially disadvantaged.
I don't think I mentioned 'white folks'. Where did I say they don't commit crimes?
No you didn't, you just mentioned the Chinese, Somalians and "so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas", as if multiculturalism is a sullied concept responsible for a proliferation of crime. I countered your thought by saying those who don't belong to an alternative culture, i.e. home spun white folk, also commit crimes. My apologies, if you think I made you out to be more racist than you actually are.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Schools are a rather silly example. It's a tiny, closed environment. Do you expect blood-baths at every school?
Not at all. It's a microcosm of the world at large. Where our young go 'to work'. It's where they learn to mix (and have been doing for the last sixty odd years in London) before they go out into the wider world, understanding that 'multiculturalism' may not be as divisive as you make it out to be. It's where I learned it.

Do you expect "blood baths" everywhere else, then? Or is that just another implicit sweeping generalisation?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:As it is, the better off invariably flock to the 'reputable schools'--and we all know what THAT means.
I know what it means to me but I'm never entirely sure what you mean. You shift the ground beneath an argument so often, and with such force, I hear they are creating a Richter scale expressly for when you write.

I think you'll find that, in the modern age, some of the top schools have a mix of the children of Arab sheikhs, African 'royalty', Bollywood stars etc... as well as those of the old school aristocrats, indigenous established and nouveau riche.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:There are poor in every country. Always have been. Here, one murder in a year used to make headlines. Now it's an every day occurrence.
How many more sweeping generalisations are you going to make? And are you suggesting they are race crimes, crimes of poverty??? What point are you actually making in the context of this discussion?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:And it is possible to have a 'heart that beats in the interests of the socially disadvantaged' without being a fanatical, 'racism hidden in every word' PC twat.
I have never before accused anyone of racism here, despite you making yet another sweeping generalisation about me seeing "racism hidden in every word".

Speaking of your affinity for sweeping generalisations: you need only go back and read the sweeping generalisation you made about multiculturalism, to see what made me come out of my forum slumber.

You do realise that the fact you resort to expletive doesn't strngthen your argument any? If anything it makes you sound more like the BNP low life that normally make the kind of statement you seem to be making.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote: I'm not sure what part of the world you live in but I'm in a part of London that's fairly mixed. Those that want to stick to their culture do, those that don't mix. You need only look to your average central London comprehensive school to see that. It's a big melting pot. Something for everyone. Generally people get on... if only with their own lives. Crimes are not deemed 'multicultural' so much as socio-economic. It's poverty, lack of income, feeling disadvantaged that gives rise to crime... Not culture. There are as many poor white folks as disadvantaged immigrants... and guess what?!! They commit crimes, too! It seems that the biggest criminals here, in the last decade, have been the politicians or News International cronies!

I think there are many people here who would rather be 'politically correct' than an aggressive bully who feels the the need to impress on others that they are somehow better than them.

Whatever you think of how others appropriate language... and that's all it is at the end if the day: how YOU think others appropriate language, when it doesn't fit in with how YOU would have everyone else speak... if it's to the benefit, or defence, of others, who may be at a disadvantage, it's not all bad. For all it's misdirected liberal bias, 'political correctness' still has a heart that beats In the interests of the socially disadvantaged.
I don't think I mentioned 'white folks'. Where did I say they don't commit crimes?
No you didn't, you just mentioned the Chinese, Somalians and "so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas", as if multiculturalism is a sullied concept responsible for a proliferation of crime. I countered your thought by saying those who don't belong to an alternative culture, i.e. home spun white folk, also commit crimes. My apologies, if you think I made you out to be more racist than you actually are.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Schools are a rather silly example. It's a tiny, closed environment. Do you expect blood-baths at every school?
Not at all. It's a microcosm of the world at large. Where our young go 'to work'. It's where they learn to mix (and have been doing for the last sixty odd years in London) before they go out into the wider world, understanding that 'multiculturalism' may not be as divisive as you make it out to be. It's where I learned it.

Do you expect "blood baths" everywhere else, then? Or is that just another implicit sweeping generalisation?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:As it is, the better off invariably flock to the 'reputable schools'--and we all know what THAT means.
I know what it means to me but I'm never entirely sure what you mean. You shift the ground beneath an argument so often, and with such force, I hear they are creating a Richter scale expressly for when you write.

I think you'll find that, in the modern age, some of the top schools have a mix of the children of Arab sheikhs, African 'royalty', Bollywood stars etc... as well as those of the old school aristocrats, indigenous established and nouveau riche.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:There are poor in every country. Always have been. Here, one murder in a year used to make headlines. Now it's an every day occurrence.
How many more sweeping generalisations are you going to make? And are you suggesting they are race crimes, crimes of poverty??? What point are you actually making in the context of this discussion?
''children of Arab sheikhs, African 'royalty', Bollywood stars''
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:And it is possible to have a 'heart that beats in the interests of the socially disadvantaged' without being a fanatical, 'racism hidden in every word' PC twat.
I have never before accused anyone of racism here, despite you making yet another sweeping generalisation about me seeing "racism hidden in every word".

Speaking of your affinity for sweeping generalisations: you need only go back and read the sweeping generalisation you made about multiculturalism, to see what made me come out of my forum slumber.
How many 'races' would you have liked me to mention in order to not be 'racist' in your eyes? :lol: Not that I give a shit whether you think I'm a racist or not. The PC always trot out the R card when they feel uncomfortable. You are the racist one, assuming I wasn't including white people :lol:
''Speaking of your affinity for sweeping generalisations: you need only go back and read the sweeping generalisation you made about multiculturalism, to see what made me come out of my forum slumber.''
I would love to know how it's possible to 'generalise sweepingly' about a made-up word. Why do think I invariably give it irony marks?
''I have never before accused anyone of racism here, despite you making yet another sweeping generalisation about me seeing "racism hidden in every word". ''
Where did I say I was talking about you? You really are unbearably self-absorbed. It's funny though. You say that, and then go on to accuse me of 'racism'. You really could do stand-up.
''children of Arab sheikhs, African 'royalty', Bollywood stars''
Oh, in other words the average person. :lol:

''You do realise that the fact you resort to expletive doesn't strngthen your argument any?''
You call 'twat' an 'expletive'? :lol:

''This piece is 20 years old and refers to A'levels, you stupid cow.''
''To be honest, there are better people here to engage with than you. I can chase up the source but for you... Fuck that! You're not worth it. There are others here who are. Time wasting fool.''
'' f@ck off and let the rest of us engage in thinking without needing to suffer you appearing to use it as an excuse for personal attack.''

:lol:
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by ForCruxSake »


Do you understand the concept of discussion? Part of it requires that you answer questions asked of you, rather than ignore them and just swap in questions of your own...?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: How many 'races' would you have liked me to mention in order to not be 'racist' in your eyes? :lol: Not that I give a shit whether you think I'm a racist or not.
''children of Arab sheikhs, African 'royalty', Bollywood stars''
Oh, in other words the average person. :lol:
Removing words from their context doesn't suddenly whip up a meaning you want them to mean, no more than accusing people of appropriating words for PC alignment means that that is what they are actually doing.

And you do care about being called racist, or else why make such an issue of it?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote:''You do realise that the fact you resort to expletive doesn't strengthen your argument any?''
You call 'twat' an 'expletive'? :lol:
Yes. It is one, where I come from. Any woman who uses it as a derogatory term, is a fool. They should credit their genitalia with more respect. I suspect yours doesn't get much.
''This piece is 20 years old and refers to A'levels, you stupid cow.''
''To be honest, there are better people here to engage with than you. I can chase up the source but for you... Fuck that! You're not worth it. There are others here who are. Time wasting fool.''
'' f@ck off and let the rest of us engage in thinking without needing to suffer you appearing to use it as an excuse for personal attack.''

:lol:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to show that in every exchange with you, I don't actually have to behave like you. I think it's part of the reason I took issue with you over your ideas about multiculturalism ... apart from the bigger reason: that what you were saying was decidedly dodgy :)
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

ForCruxSake wrote: And you do care about being called racist, or else why make such an issue of it? [/size]
An 'issue'? I didn't even bother to say if I am or am not one. That's how much I 'care'. It's not relevant to facts. It's also a word that has been rendered meaningless due to over-use by illiterate morons like you. If someone is called a 'racist' simply because they object to open door mass immigration of cultures with completely different values systems into a country with a tiny population and fragile infrastructure then what the fuck do you call Southern rednecks who lynch black children? There's no point in even using the word any more unless it's some PC shit-head trying to silence free speech.

You call 'twat' an 'expletive'? :lol:
ForCruxSake wrote:Yes. It is one, where I come from. Any woman who uses it as a derogatory term, is a fool. They should credit their genitalia with more respect. I suspect yours doesn't get much.

''Twat: a person regarded as stupid or obnoxious.'' I can't help it if you have a filthy mind.



Thank you for giving me the opportunity to show that in every exchange with you, I don't actually have to behave like you. I think it's part of the reason I took issue with you over your ideas about multiculturalism ... apart from the bigger reason: that what you were saying was decidedly dodgy :)
You are welcome. If you did you would actually come up with a counterargument once in a while instead of hysterical insults.
As much as I enjoy shooting fish in a barrel even that gets boring after a while.


Btw, big lettering makes for a compelling 'argument'. Just ask Bob. :)
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by ForCruxSake »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote: And you do care about being called racist, or else why make such an issue of it?
An 'issue'? I didn't even bother to say if I am or am not one. That's how much I 'care'. It's not relevant to facts. It's also a word that has been rendered meaningless due to over-use by illiterate morons like you. If someone is called a 'racist' simply because they object to open door mass immigration of cultures with completely different values systems into a country with a tiny population and fragile infrastructure then what the fuck do you call Southern rednecks who lynch black children?
Oh my God, you think your racism is diminished by the greater racism of others? How on earth do you think it all starts? As that rope was thrown over the branch of a tree, it's not unreasonable to suppose it started with someone saying: 'Who the hell do these people think they are? This is OUR country." (Weird how similar that sounds to what you are saying. Using terms like 'fragile infrastructure' doesn't mask the deplorable intent of your words. The only person who seemed to make that kind of rhetoric work was Hitler. Don't be flattered that I'm comparing you to Hitler. What he said actually had an effect on people.)
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:There's no point in even using the word any more unless it's some PC shit-head trying to silence free speech.
Er no, you were deemed 'racist' because you made some sweeping statement about crime being 'so high' in densely populated multicultural areas, because of multiculturalism. There's always a point to be made in using the word 'racist'. Scrubbing it away, by labelling it PC, and an assault on freedom of speech, is just your way of allowing your brand of racist jargon, the freedom to travel, without challenge. I have no problem with you having *the right to say* this dangerous stuff. It's the dangerous stuff I find objectionable and it does deserve to be called out for what it is: racist rhetoric.

Here are the 'facts' you presented with respect to this particular argument:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:"Different cultures don't mix and never will, which is why you find so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas."

"As it is, the better off invariably flock to the 'reputable schools'--and we all know what THAT means."

"There are poor in every country. Always have been."

"Here, one murder in a year used to make headlines. Now it's an everyday occurrence."
A mixed bag of disparate (or should that be 'desperate') statements, laughably termed 'facts'. You rant on about 'facts' when most of what you express is just angry, opinionated rhetoric where what you say may not even be relevant to the point of the argument.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:You call 'twat' an 'expletive'? :lol:
Yes. It is one, where I come from. Any woman who uses it as a derogatory term, is a fool. They should credit their genitalia with more respect. I suspect yours doesn't get much.
''Twat: a person regarded as stupid or obnoxious.'' I can't help it if you have a filthy mind.
What me? Surely not. I think you must mean the publishers at Harper Collins:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dicti ... glish/twat
...and just about every reputable dictionary, which mentions 'twat' as being a slang term for a woman's genitals, which is where the insult originated (....unless you wish to contend that a word meaning "stupid or obnoxious" was appropriated to mean female genitalia? It wouldn't surprise me if you did.)

It's just another fine example of how you fillet meanings, to serve up what you wish to express, leaving the plate of the argument empty.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote:Thank you for giving me the opportunity to show that in every exchange with you, I don't actually have to behave like you. I think it's part of the reason I took issue with you over your ideas about multiculturalism ... apart from the bigger reason: that what you were saying was decidedly dodgy :)
You are welcome. If you did you would actually come up with a counterargument once in a while instead of hysterical insults.
I think I've done ok today. I've made my point. Asked questions to further discussion that you've failed to answer. I've actually stuck to the point instead of having to draft in quotes from other threads, like you, just to pepper the discussion with insult : you're go to method of expressing yourself when you can't pack a punch any other way. Though in all fairness, and at the risk of repeating myself, I'm glad you did that as it helped prove I don't ALWAYS have to react like you do.

I think you really should look up the word 'hysterical'. Today doesn't seem a good day for you to actually understand some of the words you're using.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Btw, big lettering makes for a compelling 'argument'. Just ask Bob. :)
This is big lettering? It's not something I'm given to doing, I even had to manually reduce it from the standard PN 'large' format... but at 3am, in low light, it's easier to read, when editing a post. It never crossed my mind that large text could make an argument more compelling, just more readable... or if too large, 'shouty'. You clearly have a low threshold for, or understanding of, text size... or are you just desperate to have something irrelevant to add to a discussion you've already contributed very little to addressing?

As we've now been led to the subject of readability... You seem to have little idea how to layout text. It's messy and hard to distinguish when you edit so poorly. Even with all your coloured text and bold highlighting, what you write is a mess to read, and navigate, when creating my own post. Slightly enlarging my text, last night, seems additionally fruitful to me, as it helped differentiate what I was saying from your nonsense. You're welcome. :)
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote: And you do care about being called racist, or else why make such an issue of it?
An 'issue'? I didn't even bother to say if I am or am not one. That's how much I 'care'. It's not relevant to facts. It's also a word that has been rendered meaningless due to over-use by illiterate morons like you. If someone is called a 'racist' simply because they object to open door mass immigration of cultures with completely different values systems into a country with a tiny population and fragile infrastructure then what the fuck do you call Southern rednecks who lynch black children?
Oh my God, you think your racism is diminished by the greater racism of others? How on earth do you think it all starts? As that rope was thrown over the branch of a tree, it's not unreasonable to suppose it started with someone saying: 'Who the hell do these people think they are? This is OUR country." (Weird how similar that sounds to what you are saying. Using terms like 'fragile infrastructure' doesn't mask the deplorable intent of your words. The only person who seemed to make that kind of rhetoric work was Hitler. Don't be flattered that I'm comparing you to Hitler. What he said actually had an effect on people.)
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:There's no point in even using the word any more unless it's some PC shit-head trying to silence free speech.
Er no, you were deemed 'racist' because you made some sweeping statement about crime being 'so high' in densely populated multicultural areas, because of multiculturalism. There's always a point to be made in using the word 'racist'. Scrubbing it away, by labelling it PC, and an assault on freedom of speech, is just your way of allowing your brand of racist jargon, the freedom to travel, without challenge. I have no problem with you having *the right to say* this dangerous stuff. It's the dangerous stuff I find objectionable and it does deserve to be called out for what it is: racist rhetoric.

Here are the 'facts' you presented with respect to this particular argument:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:"Different cultures don't mix and never will, which is why you find so much crime in 'multicultural melting-pot' areas."

"As it is, the better off invariably flock to the 'reputable schools'--and we all know what THAT means."

"There are poor in every country. Always have been."

"Here, one murder in a year used to make headlines. Now it's an everyday occurrence."
A mixed bag of disparate (or should that be 'desperate') statements, laughably termed 'facts'. You rant on about 'facts' when most of what you express is just angry, opinionated rhetoric where what you say may not even be relevant to the point of the argument.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote: Yes. It is one, where I come from. Any woman who uses it as a derogatory term, is a fool. They should credit their genitalia with more respect. I suspect yours doesn't get much.
''Twat: a person regarded as stupid or obnoxious.'' I can't help it if you have a filthy mind.
What me? Surely not. I think you must mean the publishers at Harper Collins:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dicti ... glish/twat
...and just about every reputable dictionary, which mentions 'twat' as being a slang term for a woman's genitals, which is where the insult originated (....unless you wish to contend that a word meaning "stupid or obnoxious" was appropriated to mean female genitalia? It wouldn't surprise me if you did.)

It's just another fine example of how you fillet meanings, to serve up what you wish to express, leaving the plate of the argument empty.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
ForCruxSake wrote:Thank you for giving me the opportunity to show that in every exchange with you, I don't actually have to behave like you. I think it's part of the reason I took issue with you over your ideas about multiculturalism ... apart from the bigger reason: that what you were saying was decidedly dodgy :)
You are welcome. If you did you would actually come up with a counterargument once in a while instead of hysterical insults.
I think I've done ok today. I've made my point. Asked questions to further discussion that you've failed to answer. I've actually stuck to the point instead of having to draft in quotes from other threads, like you, just to pepper the discussion with insult : you're go to method of expressing yourself when you can't pack a punch any other way. Though in all fairness, and at the risk of repeating myself, I'm glad you did that as it helped prove I don't ALWAYS have to react like you do.

I think you really should look up the word 'hysterical'. Today doesn't seem a good day for you to actually understand some of the words you're using.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Btw, big lettering makes for a compelling 'argument'. Just ask Bob. :)
This is big lettering? It's not something I'm given to doing, I even had to manually reduce it from the standard PN 'large' format... but at 3am, in low light, it's easier to read, when editing a post. It never crossed my mind that large text could make an argument more compelling, just more readable... or if too large, 'shouty'. You clearly have a low threshold for, or understanding of, text size... or are you just desperate to have something irrelevant to add to a discussion you've already contributed very little to addressing?

As we've now been led to the subject of readability... You seem to have little idea how to layout text. It's messy and hard to distinguish when you edit so poorly. Even with all your coloured text and bold highlighting, what you write is a mess to read, and navigate, when creating my own post. Slightly enlarging my text, last night, seems additionally fruitful to me, as it helped differentiate what I was saying from your nonsense. You're welcome. :)
Racist bitch.
Londoner
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:47 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by Londoner »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: You call 'twat' an 'expletive'?
Maybe this is some genuine cultural misunderstanding; in the UK I can confirm it is pretty strong language and everyone would understand it as a crude anatomical reference.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Londoner wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: You call 'twat' an 'expletive'?
Maybe this is some genuine cultural misunderstanding; in the UK I can confirm it is pretty strong language and everyone would understand it as a crude anatomical reference.
Is kunt better?

Twat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Twat (disambiguation).

The word twat is widely used as a derogatory epithet, especially in British English, referring to a person considered obnoxious or stupid.[1][2] It is also used informally as a verb in British English to mean "to hit or punch a person".[2] In British English and Commonwealth English, it is pronounced /twæt/ to rhyme with that, or sometimes /twɒt/, to rhyme with hot.[3] In North American English, it is pronounced /twɑːt/, to rhyme with squat.[1] Twat is also used in the United States as vulgar slang for the vulva.[1]
Last edited by vegetariantaxidermy on Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by ForCruxSake »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Rascist bitch.
Did you actually take the time to look up the word 'hysterical'? :lol:
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Rascist bitch.
Did you actually take the time to look up the word 'hysterical'? :lol:
8)
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by ForCruxSake »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Londoner wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: You call 'twat' an 'expletive'?
Maybe this is some genuine cultural misunderstanding; in the UK I can confirm it is pretty strong language and everyone would understand it as a crude anatomical reference.
Is kunt better?
Thanks for clearing that up, Londoner, but it doesn't matter how many voices sing the same words, she's clearly deaf to the chorus. :)

And no, it isn't better, VT. It's just you being worse, as is your way with everything. :lol:

Disguising the 'c' word with a 'k' pretty much sums up how you argue: same old rubbish, with the odd change of (irrelevant) thought.
ForCruxSake
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:48 am

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by ForCruxSake »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Londoner wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: You call 'twat' an 'expletive'?
Maybe this is some genuine cultural misunderstanding; in the UK I can confirm it is pretty strong language and everyone would understand it as a crude anatomical reference.
Is kunt better?

Twat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Twat (disambiguation).

The word twat is widely used as a derogatory epithet, especially in British English, referring to a person considered obnoxious or stupid.[1][2] It is also used informally as a verb in British English to mean "to hit or punch a person".[2] In British English and Commonwealth English, it is pronounced /twæt/ to rhyme with that, or sometimes /twɒt/, to rhyme with hot.[3] In North American English, it is pronounced /twɑːt/, to rhyme with squat.[1] Twat is also used in the United States as vulgar slang for the vulva.[1]
Desperate grab there VT. The bad thing about Wikipedia is ANYONE can write it. The good thing about Wikipedia is ANYONE can correct it, if they can be arsed. :)

Like most people, I prefer reputable dictionaries to check words against. Wikipedia just doesn't have the same clout when it comes to defining individual words.

Try this. It's not the OED but it's better at discussing the root of the word than Wikipedia.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/twat
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Vegetariantaxidermy's racist comment

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

ForCruxSake wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Londoner wrote:
Maybe this is some genuine cultural misunderstanding; in the UK I can confirm it is pretty strong language and everyone would understand it as a crude anatomical reference.
Is kunt better?

Twat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Twat (disambiguation).

The word twat is widely used as a derogatory epithet, especially in British English, referring to a person considered obnoxious or stupid.[1][2] It is also used informally as a verb in British English to mean "to hit or punch a person".[2] In British English and Commonwealth English, it is pronounced /twæt/ to rhyme with that, or sometimes /twɒt/, to rhyme with hot.[3] In North American English, it is pronounced /twɑːt/, to rhyme with squat.[1] Twat is also used in the United States as vulgar slang for the vulva.[1]
Desperate grab there VT. The bad thing about Wikipedia is ANYONE can write it. The good thing about Wikipedia is ANYONE can correct it, if they can be arsed. :)

Like most people, I prefer reputable dictionaries to check words against. Wikipedia just doesn't have the same clout when it comes to defining individual words.

Try this. It's not the OED but it's better at discussing the root of the word than Wikipedia.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/twat
Let's have an argument about the meaning of 'twat' shall we?
Locked