Cut off from women in combat

[ConHog]

Whats next,, niggers ?

[jimnyc]

Whats next,, niggers ?

:rolleyes:

[ConHog]

:rolleyes:


Same level of discrimination. If someone is qualified theyre qualified.

[Drummond]

Whats next,, niggers ?:wtf99::shitfan:

[jimnyc]

Same level of discrimination. If someone is qualified theyre qualified.

Just didn't see the need to purposely be offensive.

[aboutime]

Just didn't see the need to purposely be offensive.


???

[ConHog]

Just didn't see the need to purposely be offensive.

Shock value

And really there is no substantive difference between nigger and oh say queer. Unless youre directing either at a specific person. Big deal

[Drummond]

Shock value

And really there is no substantive difference between nigger and oh say queer. Unless youre directing either at a specific person. Big deal

I've no interest in concentrating on this (why feed the issue further ?) ... but it's obvious to anybody that each of those terms is a disparagement. If NOT meant in that way, other words could've been used instead.

As you said .. 'shock value'. Expressed for just that effect, and gratuitous in nature and intent. Pointless otherwise.

[jimnyc]

Shock value

And really there is no substantive difference between nigger and oh say queer. Unless youre directing either at a specific person. Big deal

I guess we're just different. Carry on, twas my bad for even posting a smiley.

[aboutime]

I've no interest in concentrating on this (why feed the issue further ?) ... but it's obvious to anybody that each of those terms is a disparagement. If NOT meant in that way, other words could've been used instead.

As you said .. 'shock value'. Expressed for just that effect. Pointless otherwise, though.


Sir Drummond. That is merely another test of the Admin. standards here on this forum.

It's called Stretching the Envelope...experimenting to see just how far stupid can go.

[Kathianne]

I guess we're just different. Carry on, twas my bad for even posting a smiley.

Indeed, he's very different.

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. That is merely another test of the Admin. standards here on this forum.

It's called Stretching the Envelope...experimenting to see just how far stupid can go.

Quite ...

This is also appropriate, I think ...

:trolls:

[aboutime]

quite ...

This is also appropriate, i think ...

:trolls:


​Agreed! Totally!

[Kathianne]

Shock value

And really there is no substantive difference between nigger and oh say queer. Unless youre directing either at a specific person. Big deal

though there's lots of differences between females and 'men, gays, male niggers,' etc.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

:rolleyes:


http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by ConHog http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=612482#post612482)
Whats next,, niggers ?


Jim who was addressed by that question??? If it was a reply to my post I want some action taken on it!! -Tyr

[ConHog]

I guess we're just different. Carry on, twas my bad for even posting a smiley.

In this instance we're not as different as you claim. You gratuitously use the word queer when referring to gays. Big deal because I've never seriously anyway seen you call a specific person a queer. Same as you must admit I've never called a specific person a nigger.

Either they are both offensive , or neither is offensive.

[jimnyc]

In this instance we're not as different as you claim. You gratuitously use the word queer when referring to gays. Big deal because I've never seriously anyway seen you call a specific person a queer. Same as you must admit I've never called a specific person a nigger.

Either they are both offensive , or neither is offensive.

I suppose "fag" and "homo" are offensive to some too. But if you think they are all on the same plane as the N word, therein lies the problem. But hey, you think it's OK to ask a woman for pictures of her P^%$ as well, meaning a cat. I don't. I guess we have different levels of offensive. I'll defer.

[Abbey Marie]

I suppose "fag" and "homo" are offensive to some too. But if you think they are all on the same plane as the N word, therein lies the problem. But hey, you think it's OK to ask a woman for pictures of her P^%$ as well, meaning a cat. I don't. I guess we have different levels of offensive. I'll defer.

The list of what is offensive is endless, and depends very much on the perceiver. But in our society, the "N" word stands almost on a different level of offensive.

[ConHog]

The list of what is offensive is endless, and depends very much on the perceiver. But in our society, the "N" word stands almost on a different level of offensive.

see Abbey, I disagree with that right there, and honestly that's why I don't have a problem using the word.

IF it were so offensive, would black people really run around calling each other nigger? I mean seriously, no one in my wife's family has EVER called another Mexican a beaner, just as an example.

[Abbey Marie]

see Abbey, I disagree with that right there, and honestly that's why I don't have a problem using the word.

IF it were so offensive, would black people really run around calling each other nigger? I mean seriously, no one in my wife's family has EVER called another Mexican a beaner, just as an example.

And gays have long called themselves "queers". It is hypocritical, but doesn't change the fact that the N word is in a (no)class by itself. I'm not 100% guilt-free, but I try to stay away from offensive language, period. I'd rather communicate in other ways.

[jimnyc]

And gays have long called themselves "queers". It is hypocritical, but doesn't change the fact that the N word is in a (no)class by itself. I'm not 100% guilt-free, but I try to stay away from offensive language, period. I'd rather communicate in other ways.

It's like saying that using the "C" word about women, and calling one a bitch, is the same. Yep, both offensive for sure - but I wouldn't claim that the B word is just as offensive.

[ConHog]

It's like saying that using the "C" word about women, and calling one a bitch, is the same. Yep, both offensive for sure - but I wouldn't claim that the B word is just as offensive.

see now there's a word we agree is over the line, which just goes to show it's all about perspective.

My main issue though is when people say you're a racist for using the word, just as dumb as when people call you and I mean you personally Jim a homophobe for using the word queer. That is dumb, I mean dumb beyond the obvious fact that no one fears gays.

It's a word, nothing more. Okay it's an offensive word, but there are lots of offensive words out there. Is this one more offensive than others? To you and others it is , to me it is not.

By the way, if it offended you so much that you made a rule against it's use as you have with "the C word" I would surely abide.

I guess I only find words offensive if used towards someone .

[jimnyc]

^^ There's a ton of words that aren't banned here. I just think there is a time and a place for each. The C word, I just don't think there is a place for it. As for others that 'may' go over the line, I don't think the place is in the middle of good threads, where it could offend others who don't think like you, and only entered the thread for a good discussion.

[ConHog]

^^ There's a ton of words that aren't banned here. I just think there is a time and a place for each. The C word, I just don't think there is a place for it. As for others that 'may' go over the line, I don't think the place is in the middle of good threads, where it could offend others who don't think like you, and only entered the thread for a good discussion.

I agree, time and place for everything.

IMHO saying "what's next niggers ?" When referring to discrimination within the military is an appropriate time and place.

All good that you disagree.

[jimnyc]

To be fair to Trigg and the thread she started, the off topic crap was moved to it's own thread. I am hesitant to move it to the cage, due to the nature, and don't want to be accused of censoring.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Whats next,, niggers ?

Without having read this thread, I'm assuming you used that word for it's 'shock value'. Still, not a very appropriate word to use, as it is considered offensive while 'women' is not, and my assumption was that you were essentially comparing the two groups.

So, since the discussion was on 'women' in combat, an equally unoffensive word to use in here would have been 'blacks' or 'African Americans'.

Just my 2 cents.

[ConHog]

To be fair to Trigg and the thread she started, the off topic crap was moved to it's own thread. I am hesitant to move it to the cage, due to the nature, and don't want to be accused of censoring.

A fair move as we did veer way off topic.

As for your last little line about censoring. you know I had a pretty good little response typed out earlier that pointedly stated I think YOU personally do a very good job of not censuring stuff on the board, as we've all seen happen on other boards. I simply deleted it without posting b/c it got kinda windy.

But I do want to clarify, when I was talking about censuring, I surely didn't mean by you as the owner or admin of the board. I actually have always said that about you, not sure why you read it wrong.

[ConHog]

Without having read this thread, I'm assuming you used that word for it's 'shock value'. Still, not a very appropriate word to use, as it is considered offensive while 'women' is not, and my assumption was that you were essentially comparing the two groups.

So, since the discussion was on 'women' in combat, an equally unoffensive word to use in here would have been 'blacks' or 'African Americans'.

Just my 2 cents.

I wasn't going for equally offensive. I was going for "let's return to 1939 type stereotypes"

[Marcus Aurelius]

I wasn't going for equally offensive. I was going for "let's return to 1939 type stereotypes"

I see.

[jimnyc]

I see.

Did he succeed?