Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Are -blam!- people too flamboyant?
  • Subject: Are -blam!- people too flamboyant?
Subject: Are -blam!- people too flamboyant?

Posted by: Great_Pretender
Case and point: don't worry about it. Girls start getting boobies pretty soon, and then you'll have plenty of other things to think about. Being an Inheritor is not a life goal.
-TGP-

Posted by: NewRadical12
No, FJ, it does not bother me that some people are "flamboyant" because I have the maturity and intelligence to recognize that my lifestyle choices with regards to whom I have sex with, how I dress, talk, and act, and how I carry myself in general are not normatively better than any other set of characteristics not considered mainstream by society. Your attempt to dismiss those who act "flamboyant" amounts to little more than a desperate and bigoted attempt to justify your own blind devotion to heterosexist and transphobic standards of conduct that continue to oppress millions to this day.
Ease up bro. It's not like OP is out beating people up because they're -blam!-. He's expressing his opinion which he is entitled to. How are you any better than what you're describing him as? You're attempting to claim that he has an irrational hatred of -blam!- people based on his annoyances. That doesn't seem like you're attempting to put off his opinion and generalize him?
You can disagree with someone's opinion without getting your jimmies rustled you know.

  • 01.06.2013 2:25 AM PDT


Posted by: Xplode441
Posted by: NewRadical12
No, FJ, it does not bother me that some people are "flamboyant" because I have the maturity and intelligence to recognize that my lifestyle choices with regards to whom I have sex with, how I dress, talk, and act, and how I carry myself in general are not normatively better than any other set of characteristics not considered mainstream by society. Your attempt to dismiss those who act "flamboyant" amounts to little more than a desperate and bigoted attempt to justify your own blind devotion to heterosexist and transphobic standards of conduct that continue to oppress millions to this day.
Ease up bro. It's not like OP is out beating people up because they're -blam!-. He's expressing his opinion which he is entitled to. How are you any better than what you're describing him as? You're attempting to claim that he has an irrational hatred of -blam!- people based on his annoyances. That doesn't seem like you're attempting to put off his opinion and generalize him?
You can disagree with someone's opinion without getting your jimmies rustled you know.


Oh you don't know fleshjack.

  • 01.06.2013 2:27 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

Posted by: Ric_Adbur
Posted by: Baph117
Canadian Na­zism is a polite ideology, ok?
"Into the boxcar now... there you go. Oh, watch your head. Here, let me help you... Yep, showers are right through there. No problem at all."


Posted by: floppy willy
Oh you don't know fleshjack.
No one really knows Fleshjack.

  • 01.06.2013 2:27 AM PDT


Posted by: Baph117

Posted by: floppy willy
Oh you don't know fleshjack.
No one really knows Fleshjack.


I do, it's the toy I keep in...wait

  • 01.06.2013 2:29 AM PDT

"Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

NewRadical is right. FJ is wrong. I am out.

[Edited on 01.06.2013 2:30 AM PST]

  • 01.06.2013 2:29 AM PDT

Posted by: Great_Pretender
Case and point: don't worry about it. Girls start getting boobies pretty soon, and then you'll have plenty of other things to think about. Being an Inheritor is not a life goal.
-TGP-

Posted by: floppy willy
Oh you don't know fleshjack.
Is he a known jimmy rustler? I must say, he's done quite a good job on a few people in this thread.

  • 01.06.2013 2:29 AM PDT

Nope.

  • 01.06.2013 2:31 AM PDT


Posted by: Xplode441
Posted by: floppy willy
Oh you don't know fleshjack.
Is he a known jimmy rustler? I must say, he's done quite a good job on a few people in this thread.


Well in a private group, literally all he does is make anti-ghey threads, and newrad knows that flesh is h0mophobic for that reason. So pretty much.

  • 01.06.2013 2:32 AM PDT

If we disagree, it's nothing personal, opinions are opinions.
Antagonizing me to build a false sense of worth is so damn cute.

Brighten your day with science.

Posted by: random no337
Posted by: Halifaxiewait wait waaaait..

since when were you back?
I was too wondering this.

  • 01.06.2013 2:35 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
A real test of a man is if he is willing to scrape a sharpened razor up and down his junk just to please a woman.


Posted by: Fleshjack

Posted by: Sh1n1ng Wolf

Posted by: Fleshjack

Posted by: Sh1n1ng Wolf

Posted by: Fleshjack

Flamboyant

Not flamboyant

See the difference?
...Yeah, now why did you make a thread literally saying "All -blam!- people are flamboyant"
Your reading comprehension is strong.

What really bothers me is when they are super flamboyant and in your face about it.When implies it always happens, and I do in fact know how to -blam!- read.
No it doesn't...

I am fine with dogs when they don't chew the furniture. Not all dogs chew furniture though...
"If" implies a chance of it happening, and "when" is a person's guarantee that it will. When works in dog example sentence because it's saying that the person in question is fine with dogs while they are not eating furnature. If also works in place of when since it's saying either could happen. Saying when in place of if in the quoted sentence is saying you don't like it when you meet -blam!-s that are being flamboyent, as if it's a guarantee, although the entire OP sort of implies that this is the way -blam!-s behave, or else the thread wouldn't have been created in the first place to question whether or not -blam!-s are too flamboyent or not. If "when" was replaced with "if", there wouldn't be any question with what the sentence actually went.

I think it's a similar technicality like with the difference between asking someone "could you get me some ice" and "would you get me some ice." You might actually be right, though. I'm having trouble making a totally concrete explanation with the difference between when and if given the context of what I quoted. I keep saying the sentences and they could go either way.

  • 01.06.2013 2:35 AM PDT

Posted by: Great_Pretender
Case and point: don't worry about it. Girls start getting boobies pretty soon, and then you'll have plenty of other things to think about. Being an Inheritor is not a life goal.
-TGP-

Posted by: floppy willy
Well in a private group, literally all he does is make anti-ghey threads, and newrad knows that flesh is h0mophobic for that reason. So pretty much.
I have no experience with this. Although I do enjoy watching people get riled up over the internet like this. It's like watching someone who doesn't avoid the dog poop on the sidewalk and instead chooses to jump around on it and scream, "Is no one going to pick this up?!".

  • 01.06.2013 2:36 AM PDT


Posted by: Fleshjack

Posted by: floppy willy
Who are you? I don't recognize you from that group.


Gooooooood

  • 01.06.2013 2:37 AM PDT

Posted by: Xplode441
Posted by: floppy willy
Oh you don't know fleshjack.
Is he a known jimmy rustler? I must say, he's done quite a good job on a few people in this thread.
It's a continuation of a discussion from a private group. NewRad, Seggi, and the rest aren't particularly *mad* at him, but they love to point out precisely how wrong he is in order to help defend and solidify their own beliefs.

  • 01.06.2013 2:38 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

Posted by: Ric_Adbur
Posted by: Baph117
Canadian Na­zism is a polite ideology, ok?
"Into the boxcar now... there you go. Oh, watch your head. Here, let me help you... Yep, showers are right through there. No problem at all."


Posted by: Sh1n1ng Wolf
I think it's a similar technicality like with the difference between asking someone "could you get me some ice" and "would you get me some ice." You might actually be right, though. I'm having trouble making a totally concrete explanation with the difference between when and if given the context of what I quoted. I keep saying the sentences and they could go either way.
"When people in group x engage in behaviour y, it annoys me."

That sentence does not say that all people in group x are guaranteed to engage in behaviour y.

  • 01.06.2013 2:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
A real test of a man is if he is willing to scrape a sharpened razor up and down his junk just to please a woman.


Posted by: Xplode441
Posted by: Sh1n1ng Wolf
When implies it always happens, and I do in fact know how to -blam!- read.
False
'When' in this case is used to imply that it has happened and will happen in the future, not to imply a blanket statement. It is used to describe specific cases.
Well, there you go.

  • 01.06.2013 2:41 AM PDT

Posted by: Great_Pretender
Case and point: don't worry about it. Girls start getting boobies pretty soon, and then you'll have plenty of other things to think about. Being an Inheritor is not a life goal.
-TGP-

Posted by: petarded2
It's a continuation of a discussion from a private group. NewRad, Seggi, and the rest aren't particularly *mad* at him, but they love to point out precisely how wrong he is in order to help defend and solidify their own beliefs.
Seems like every time drama comes up in the Flood, it's spillage from private groups. Not that I'm complaining. It amuses me that people try to change others opinions over the internet. Pointing out facts are one thing, but an opinion versus an opinion is like trying to push a brick wall by throwing a tennis ball at it. It's just going to keep going back and forth.

  • 01.06.2013 2:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The Searcher sucks. Nobody date him.


Posted by: DarkSunnyboy1
Posted by: random no337
Posted by: Halifaxiewait wait waaaait..

since when were you back?
I was too wondering this.

Let me belay all doubts.

  • 01.06.2013 2:46 AM PDT

Posted by: Xplode441
Seems like every time drama comes up in the Flood, it's spillage from private groups. Not that I'm complaining. It amuses me that people try to change others opinions over the internet. Pointing out facts are one thing, but an opinion versus an opinion is like trying to push a brick wall by throwing a tennis ball at it. It's just going to keep going back and forth.
You don't understand: Fleshjack is the teacher. The goal is to change and discover *yourself*, not to "fix" him.

  • 01.06.2013 2:49 AM PDT

Artes, Scientia, Veritas

Sapere Aude

"But I do not think we're invincible"


Posted by: Fleshjack

Posted by: NewRadical12
I never said they were but that doesn't mean that certain set of lifestyles choices aren't more annoying than others.
They're only "annoying" to you because you have been raised in a culture that values opposite-sex attraction and gender conformity and dismisses other forms of expression. If you had grown up in a more enlightened culture that validates a wide variety of expressions of gender and orientation, you would hardly bat an eyelid. Instead of working towards such a culture by challenging your own perceptions of what is and is not "annoying," though, you have chosen the unethical path of legitimating our oppressive societal norms in a blatant attempt to make you feel better about your own lifestyle choices.

Let me ask you, FJ: how does it feel being completely positive that, unlike LGBT individuals, your gender-conforming hetero-blam!- lifestyle will never be attacked or criticized in our society? Feels good, right? That's called privilege. At some point you probably realized that you held this elevated status in society, and realized that there were two possible ways to deal with it.

The first is to make up reasons why your privilege (and the un-privileged-ness of others) was completely justified. This is the path that racists, sexists, and every other stripe of bigot have taken for millennia, and it is nothing new or interesting. This is the path of people who tried to say that Africans naturally had smaller brains, or that they were less evolved, or a different species in an attempt to justify why white individuals should hold privilege over them. It is the path of the people who kept women from independence and power on the grounds that they were naturally submissive or that their brains simply "worked differently." And it is the path, FJ, of people who think that there is something inherently "annoying" or "unnatural" about having sex in certain ways, or having sex with certain types of people, or dressing in a certain way. This path will, no doubt, make you feel better. It will let you have your privileged cake and eat it too, under the delusion that such privilege has been justly earned and that no injustice has occurred in its acquisition.

The second path is that of the thinking person - the one who realizes that societal privilege is, more often than not, not the result of outstanding merit, but is rather the outcome of millennia of oppression and prejudice. The privileged individual who realizes this will, no doubt, feel a slight degree of guilt over being the beneficiary of such oppression, but they will also realize that it is possible to redeem oneself of this guilt by working to eliminate the injustice-borne privilege they have in society. This path is not the easy one, but it is the intellectually honest one and, more importantly, the most ethical.

You have, until now, chosen the first path. You have insisted that the norms of behavior derived from brutish ideas that value gender conformity and hetero-blam!-ity are strong enough to make your own, personal annoyances resultant of their violations strong enough to pass value judgements on those who dare live in a way that acknowledges that there is no "right" way to dress. In doing so, you have reinforced the idea that there are ways of dressing that deserve to be valued over others - a belief that continues to cause distress and discrimination for many. This is completely unjustified.

Please, FJ, actually think critically about something for once in your life.

  • 01.06.2013 2:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
A real test of a man is if he is willing to scrape a sharpened razor up and down his junk just to please a woman.


Posted by: NewRadical12

Posted by: Fleshjack

Posted by: NewRadical12
I never said they were but that doesn't mean that certain set of lifestyles choices aren't more annoying than others.
They're only "annoying" to you because you have been raised in a culture that values opposite-sex attraction and gender conformity and dismisses other forms of expression. If you had grown up in a more enlightened culture that validates a wide variety of expressions of gender and orientation, you would hardly bat an eyelid. Instead of working towards such a culture by challenging your own perceptions of what is and is not "annoying," though, you have chosen the unethical path of legitimating our oppressive societal norms in a blatant attempt to make you feel better about your own lifestyle choices.

Let me ask you, FJ: how does it feel being completely positive that, unlike LGBT individuals, your gender-conforming hetero-blam!- lifestyle will never be attacked or criticized in our society? Feels good, right? That's called privilege. At some point you probably realized that you held this elevated status in society, and realized that there were two possible ways to deal with it.

The first is to make up reasons why your privilege (and the un-privileged-ness of others) was completely justified. This is the path that racists, sexists, and every other stripe of bigot have taken for millennia, and it is nothing new or interesting. This is the path of people who tried to say that Africans naturally had smaller brains, or that they were less evolved, or a different species in an attempt to justify why white individuals should hold privilege over them. It is the path of the people who kept women from independence and power on the grounds that they were naturally submissive or that their brains simply "worked differently." And it is the path, FJ, of people who think that there is something inherently "annoying" or "unnatural" about having sex in certain ways, or having sex with certain types of people, or dressing in a certain way. This path will, no doubt, make you feel better. It will let you have your privileged cake and eat it too, under the delusion that such privilege has been justly earned and that no injustice has occurred in its acquisition.

The second path is that of the thinking person - the one who realizes that societal privilege is, more often than not, not the result of outstanding merit, but is rather the outcome of millennia of oppression and prejudice. The privileged individual who realizes this will, no doubt, feel a slight degree of guilt over being the beneficiary of such oppression, but they will also realize that it is possible to redeem oneself of this guilt by working to eliminate the injustice-borne privilege they have in society. This path is not the easy one, but it is the intellectually honest one and, more importantly, the most ethical.

You have, until now, chosen the first path. You have insisted that the norms of behavior derived from brutish ideas that value gender conformity and hetero-blam!-ity are strong enough to make your own, personal annoyances resultant of their violations strong enough to pass value judgements on those who dare live in a way that acknowledges that there is no "right" way to dress. In doing so, you have reinforced the idea that there are ways of dressing that deserve to be valued over others - a belief that continues to cause distress and discrimination for many. This is completely unjustified.

Please, FJ, actually think critically about something for once in your life.
...Racism is the blue pill?

  • 01.06.2013 2:59 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Fleshjack
Someone that is flamboyant is obnoxious. I find things that are obnoxious annoying. This has nothing to do with gender or -blam!-ity. Just as much, I find people that talk "ghetto" annoying.

It has nothing to do with being racism, sexist, or homophpbic. Annoying things are annoying.


That idiot is never going to admit flamboyancy is annoying. He's just going to tell you to embrace the annoyance and enjoy it no matter what because you were raised evil.

[Edited on 01.06.2013 3:06 AM PST]

  • 01.06.2013 3:06 AM PDT