ITT we discuss the morality of insults

The Place Where Bad Threads Go To Die.

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby Seizure » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:00 pm

TeckXKnight wrote:why is this suddenly a problem?


Its always been a problem, and the main reason in congress assembled threads always end up becoming so terrible. Its one thing to brag about your most recent kill or forced acquisition. Its another completely to allow threads to go down the road of needless insults and outright hostility for no other reason than you can.
User avatar
Seizure
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:55 pm

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby burgingham » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:02 pm

TeckXKnight wrote:The Haven forums have always accepted fairly mean spirited language during heated arguments and even tolerated some outright vile spew when it comes to politics. Regardless of the words used it is always about the context and intent -- best friends calling each other carpet munching fags is endearing while that same language used aggressively is now offensive. To nitpick between words is to waste time.

I don't really think it's my place to argue one way or the other but if you don't mind my asking, why is this suddenly a problem?


I am arguing that there are qualitative differences between an insult and an insult. However, people showing me that most insults have been originally of very inappropriate nature have a point. So better to just go insult free alltogether. I will try to avoid certain terms in the future too.

I don't think nitpicking here is a waste of time. This culture of actually really mean spirited insulting is horrible.
User avatar
burgingham
 
Posts: 8486
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:58 pm

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby Amanda44 » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:06 pm

LadyV wrote:I know there are those who will disagree with my opinion on this but I think it all boils down to respect. Any term that attacks a person simply for being who they are is derogatory and uncalled for. You can insult people all you wish but there are certain lines where its no longer a condemnation of another's thoughts or actions but an attack on a their existence.

Freedom of speech is fine. Disagreeing with someone is fine. If your so vehemently opposed to someones words or actions you feel the need to insult them fine. But never attack their existence. Like it or not they are still Human and should be treated as such.

Besides there are a huge selection of words that usually far better suite what you intend to imply.


Perfectly said LadyV. :)

On a side note:

My next door neighbour is 65 years old, she refuses to accept the 'new' meaning of the word gay and uses it quite a bit in conversation. It's not that she doesn't understand the new implications, she just comes from a generation where it was used to express joy and happiness and prefers it that way. I have used the word gay in her presence as it is now commonly used and been severely 'told off' - to her the new use is just as offensive as some of us think 'fgt' is.

I guess at the end of the day it's down to the individual and an issue of respect. Personally i'd prefer it if no-one used insults, but, we all do from time to time, myself included. :(
Koru wrote:
It is like in Lord of the Flies, nobody controlls what is going on in the hearthlands, those weaker and with conscience are just fucked.
Avatar made by Jordan.
Animal lovers - Show us your pets! - viewtopic.php?f=40&t=44444#p577254
User avatar
Amanda44
 
Posts: 6485
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:13 pm

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby TwentyThree » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:09 pm

Amanda44 wrote:
LadyV wrote:I know there are those who will disagree with my opinion on this but I think it all boils down to respect. Any term that attacks a person simply for being who they are is derogatory and uncalled for. You can insult people all you wish but there are certain lines where its no longer a condemnation of another's thoughts or actions but an attack on a their existence.

Freedom of speech is fine. Disagreeing with someone is fine. If your so vehemently opposed to someones words or actions you feel the need to insult them fine. But never attack their existence. Like it or not they are still Human and should be treated as such.

Besides there are a huge selection of words that usually far better suite what you intend to imply.


Perfectly said LadyV. :)

On a side note:

My next door neighbour is 65 years old, she refuses to accept the 'new' meaning of the word gay and uses it quite a bit in conversation. It's not that she doesn't understand the new implications, she just comes from a generation where it was used to express joy and happiness and prefers it that way. I have used the word gay in her presence as it is now commonly used and been severely 'told off' - to her the new use is just as offensive as some of us think 'fgt' is.

I guess at the end of the day it's down to the individual and an issue of respect. Personally i'd prefer it if no-one used insults, but, we all do from time to time, myself included. :(


I must say, I do agree with you here Amanda. Tis a matter of respect, AND perspective.
User avatar
TwentyThree
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 10:58 pm

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby Lightning2 » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:15 pm

ramones wrote:
DDDsDD999 wrote:ITT: Dicks dick dicks, which dick the dicks back, then the dicks get dicked by dick's dick dicks then the dicks dick on the dick forums and promptly get dicked by dicks.


This. And whats all about being so popular nowadays calling each other faggot? Mods should really take some actions there to teach people how to talk.



Image
User avatar
Lightning2
 
Posts: 662
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:26 pm
Location: Sodom

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby TeckXKnight » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:16 pm

burgingham wrote:I am arguing that there are qualitative differences between an insult and an insult. However, people showing me that most insults have been originally of very inappropriate nature have a point. So better to just go insult free alltogether. I will try to avoid certain terms in the future too.

I don't think nitpicking here is a waste of time. This culture of actually really mean spirited insulting is horrible.

No insults at all is a pretty extreme shift. Language is meant to express your thoughts and feelings in as precise and concise a way as possible; shunting an entire branch of language seems a bit much and can surely stifle conversation.
User avatar
TeckXKnight
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 2:31 am
Location: How Do I?

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby burgingham » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:19 pm

Well, I thought of this more as a general debate on morals etc than a debate on actual forum rules. I know this is a hive of scum and villany ;)
User avatar
burgingham
 
Posts: 8486
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:58 pm

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby TeckXKnight » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:22 pm

burgingham wrote:Well, I thought of this more as a general debate on morals etc than a debate on actual forum rules. I know this is a hive of scum and villany ;)

Fair enough, my apologies. =)
User avatar
TeckXKnight
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 2:31 am
Location: How Do I?

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby borka » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:37 pm

It needs balls to do without insults - it shows the Ladies in the house have more of those than all that kindergarden loudmouthers around here ...
User avatar
borka
 
Posts: 9965
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:47 pm
Location: World of Sprucecap

Re: ITT we discuss the morality of insults

Postby FearTheAmish » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:38 pm

there is a huge difference in the terms "faggot" and "retarded" Faggot has always been a derogatory word for homosexuals. Similar to Nigger, zips, chinks, mic's, w/e your slur of choice is. These have always been terms that instantly show the speaker lacks any and all respect for those mentioned. "Retarded" is an old word that was originally used for anything from a machine that wasn't running properly, to someone with a handicap. Now do i think it is good to use? no but making the comparison is just silly. Personally i have an older uncle who is homosexual and he finds that term extremely offensive.
FearTheAmish
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 8:34 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Hel

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Claude [Bot] and 57 guests