Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 2 pages
No, if that were so, then we'd all be doing this face to face. We do this so we can say things we wouldn't say to a friend, or face to face in a group.
Concur. And, I actually hang out with some posters, so, in a sense I am talking to friends, or at least acquaintances.
In his recollection, he was sitting in Cole’s kitchen, “eating his mom’s pizza,” and when he went down to the basement he saw Mays standing at the head of the couch, “over on top of her, playing with himself.” I asked if he’d felt unsettled when he saw his friend masturbating on a passed-out girl. “No, I was just, like, ‘What are you doing?’ And he just smiled at me. I just said, ‘I’m going to sleep, put your clothes back on.’ I wasn’t really thinking about, Oh, this is rape. I was just thinking, He talked to her, so I don’t really care what they do.” Richmond meant that Mays’s relationship with the girl, conducted through their cell phones, somehow made what was happening acceptable. Looking at me incredulously, he explained it as if to a clueless parent: “They were texting.”
at least nobody has defended these two so far. Above par for BTF.
I mostly just don't take myself as seriously as you do.
And in fact, we know a lot more about Hannibal Lecter than we do anyone in this case.
serves little functional purpose
Two centuries after Sade, we have continued to repeat to ourselves that a larger plan integrates all people into the universal community and rules, or ought to rule, their behavior. But we have behaved as if such a link did not really exist. We have stood indifferent to genocide in Germany, while it occurred, and to mass extermination in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, to name only a few recent hecatombs. It is worthy of note that while the carnage was going on, we felt, in all candor, quite at ease. The record will show that the entire world looked on with utter indifference at horrifying deeds and that millions in Vancouver, Beijing or Australia lose no sleep over thousands upon thousands of killings in Central America. Everyone knows it. For, tell me, how could one live if one were deeply troubled by these things? (''Don't you see, Justine? Men are not disturbed for doing what they do by habit.'') In other words, millions of men die unjustly, at the hands of other men, all the time. And our response to this is: ''I know it, and that is quite sufficient. Enough said; spare me the gory details.'' But suppose someone were rash enough to persist. Assume a man were to be found who kept describing, denoting, copying, with lifelong, obsessive insistence, all the details and horrors of all crimes. Woe to him! An entire society, bristling with indignation, would crush this hideous violator of its accepted standards. Who knows, if the pestilent descriptions were to fall into unprepared hands - why, the young might be induced to raping, or thieving, or killing! Worded differently, all the outrage that slumbered during the actual performance of wholesale atrocity is suddenly awake, and ready to punish the man who, by being too spirited and imaginative a portraitist, might misguide the incautious. Would we not punish such a man, just as his countrymen did? It would feel so good to avenge a single rape after having stood indifferent to the sacrifice of millions!
The way free speech works is that you have the right to say stupid, offensive things and others have the right to call you an adolescent idiot for saying them.
And, of course, you are comparing jokes almost entirely set in fictional contexts/stand-up contexts to jokes made on an internet board about an actual, recent event (whatever happened), which is sort of like saying that it would be a barrel of monkeys to have a thread making jokes about recently active cannibalistic serial killers because Anthony Hopkins won an Oscar playing Hannibal Lecter.
But then again overcharging seems to be all the rage in DA circles right now.
These discussions attempt to tightly delineate safe terms for internet discussion
there is simply the world,
Do you realize that your argument can be sent right back at you and one might question why you're making such a fuss about people expression that they think your jokes are juvenile and offensive?
It's called conversation.
hetero male privilege
But why do you have to "cope with it"? Do you know anyone involved?
As it turns out, like others have suggested in this thread, I personally use humor as a coping mechanism to deal with the horrible things in the world. This story turns my stomach every bit as much as it does yours, but I deal with it differently.
They are pitchers. The girls said no, but they shook them off.
This is exactly the question I'd pose to anybody getting all offended. Why? Do you know anyone involved?
You're perfectly entitled to judge someone's sense of humor, just as you are entitled to judge someone's standards of beauty, or their hobbies. You're entitled to criticize it if you want. It's not the way I like to go through life, but it's your prerogative.
And just like you have the freedom to criticize people for attempting to see the humor even in the blackest of human behavior, I have the freedom to criticize you for appointing yourself a moral authority.
The reason I care is because it reflects badly on a community of which I am a part, and particularly, makes it an unwelcome place for female posters. Hell, we just had a comment in another thread (and we've had many before) about how women find the misogynist atmosphere off-putting.
I showed this to my wife and she thought many of the comments were funny.
The endless power plays from a vocal minority always seeking the moral high ground gets old fast.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (0 members)
Page rendered in 0.6425 seconds, 50 querie(s) executed