ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 10th January 2019, 07:51 PM   #561
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,106
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
It was linked earlier in this thread. You commented on it. Your evasions are becoming egregiously disingenuous at this point.
The woman who wrote the article in which other claims were made wasn't at the show. The only direct claim by an organiser is that the black/gay joke was offensive and that can be heard in the video of the incident.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 08:01 PM   #562
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,333
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You mean the actual joke? Is there any sort of disagreement over what it ws?

I haven't heard "the actual joke," but those of you who think that you have seem to be referring to this quotation from the OP:

"one of the allegedly inappropriate jokes:

During the event, Patel's performance featured commentary on his experience living in a diverse area of New York City—including a joke about a gay, black man in his neighborhood—which AAA officials deemed inappropriate. Patel joked that being gay cannot be a choice because "no one looks in the mirror and thinks, 'this black thing is too easy, let me just add another thing to it.'"


So
1) there appears to have been more than one allegedly inappropriate joke;
2) your outrage seems to be based on the summary of one joke as if it were the actual joke.

Quote:
What are you talking about?

I'm talking about your taking Patel's claim for granted, obviously.

Quote:
If you're confused I submit that you click back through the posts and follow the discussion.

I appear to be less confused than those of you who claim to know what actually happened, which is why I'm asking you: "So what was the claim that you were referring to?"
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 08:07 PM   #563
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,333
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
The woman who wrote the article in which other claims were made wasn't at the show. The only direct claim by an organiser is that the black/gay joke was offensive and that can be heard in the video of the incident.

Have you heard Patel tell the actual "black/gay joke" on stage?! I haven't, so I can't tell if it was offensive or not. In the summaries of that joke that I've seen and heard, it doesn't seem to be offensive, i.e. racist or homophobic.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 08:10 PM   #564
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,463
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Well that may be because you're ignoring the valid concerns and points and focusing on the low-hanging fruité
No, it's like that silly "NPC" meme that's been going around - where "leftists" are supposedly all "programmed" to say the same thing. Everyone who references this, though, inevitably says or writes "Orange man bad", rather than responding to any argument...

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I haven't noticed anyone on the right or left correctly using the word "triggered"... ever. The earliest misuses I noticed were identity feminists who were using it to mean "annoyed" or "angered."
And often toss it at people who show no sign of annoyance. I do agree that people with PTSD, and people who actually understand, tend to use it correctly. I didn't include it because it tends to be misused by people across the sociopolitical spectrum.

"Safe space" is another one - used to refer to gay bars, where people could simply hang out and be themselves without having the police, or just random people, try to beat or kill them. It's *not* "a place to hide from Ben Shapiro." or "A place where people from the same subculture can hang out without anyone asking the same question we've answered to other people a thousand times."

But we're getting a bit off track - I'm still entirely unconvinced that Patel was thrown out over a single stale joke (among other problems, people describe other jokes he made *after* this one that also reference black people in more obnoxious ways), it still sounds like he just bombed, and harassed an audience member to boot. I've said before that Milo Yapopsamess should be universally banned from all colleges because he outright told followers to harass a specific student who wasn't even in attendance. I generally take a very dim view of such things.

Last edited by Mumbles; 10th January 2019 at 08:11 PM.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 08:19 PM   #565
Lambchops
Muse
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 900
Without their precious persecution complex, the right wingers have nothing.

"I'm being oppressed!". Laughable.

The free market has decided that your so called "jokes" just aren't funny. Deal with it, snowflakes.
__________________
Proud Dirtbag Leftist.

Last edited by Lambchops; 10th January 2019 at 08:21 PM.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 08:41 PM   #566
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 14,369
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Actually, I've found that the more a person uses terms like "SJW", "Snowflake", "Virtue signaling" and so forth, the more likely they are to scream about trivial matters such as fictional wars on holidays, left-wingers who use curse words, evil college students who...don't like played-out jokes, and so forth.

Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
Deal with it, snowflakes.

You were saying?
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 08:49 PM   #567
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 59,905
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
You were saying?
Except those who use the terms ironically.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 09:11 PM   #568
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,628
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
He had the power but did he have the legal right?
Yes, he was just insulting the guy. While some bullying certainly goes to the level of harassment, what he was doing didn't.

Quote:
Also, what I as adult would do about toxic people is cut them out of my life.
Sure, I do the same.

Quote:
That's why it makes perfect sense to me that a comedian who unironically insults the audience is thrown off stage.
That's not akin to cutting someone out of your life. That would be analogous to getting up and leaving the performance. Kicking him off stage is analogous to cutting him out of other people's lives.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2019, 09:20 PM   #569
Lambchops
Muse
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 900
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Except those who use the terms ironically.
Indeed.

Yet another example of how the right just don't get it.
__________________
Proud Dirtbag Leftist.

Last edited by Lambchops; 10th January 2019 at 09:23 PM.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 12:52 AM   #570
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,333
Another summary of the alleged joke, as early as Nov. 30, 2018 (the OP link is to an article from Dec. 4, 2018), where it sounds much more offensive:

Quote:
Patel was one of the main events promoted beforehand.

However, his jokes quickly progressed to uncomfortable territory, including one about a gay black man who lives in his neighborhood and how “[i]t made me realize that being gay is definitely not a choice because no one wants to be gay and black.” The tension in the room increased as Patel told more jokes in this vein until organizers of the event went up on stage to stop him, citing a change in program plans.

Of course, they may have misheard what he actually said, but it would be pretty stupid (and not particularly funny) to claim that no gay black man is happy with the color of his skin and his sexuality.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 11th January 2019 at 12:53 AM.
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 03:31 AM   #571
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by dann View Post
I haven't heard "the actual joke," but those of you who think that you have seem to be referring to this quotation from the OP:

"one of the allegedly inappropriate jokes:

During the event, Patel's performance featured commentary on his experience living in a diverse area of New York City—including a joke about a gay, black man in his neighborhood—which AAA officials deemed inappropriate. Patel joked that being gay cannot be a choice because "no one looks in the mirror and thinks, 'this black thing is too easy, let me just add another thing to it.'"


So
1) there appears to have been more than one allegedly inappropriate joke;
2) your outrage seems to be based on the summary of one joke as if it were the actual joke.
I ask again: is there any disagreement as to the nature of the joke? You seem to want to say yes in order to continue to disagree with me, but at the same time are unable to really do so.

Quote:
I'm talking about your taking Patel's claim for granted, obviously.
Then you are talking about a figment of your imagination.

Quote:
I appear to be less confused than those of you who claim to know what actually happened, which is why I'm asking you: "So what was the claim that you were referring to?"
Again, if you want to deal with your confusion, follow the discussion to its source. Your current behaviour indicates that your goal is simply to disagree with me, rather than actually clarify the things you seem to want to see clarified.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 03:36 AM   #572
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
No, it's like that silly "NPC" meme that's been going around - where "leftists" are supposedly all "programmed" to say the same thing.
Just because one 'meme' is being used this way is not an argument in support of a certain, completely different term being used that way as well.

It's pretty clear that "SJW", a term I dislike because of how unwieldy it is, refers to people on the left who have taken the various women- and minotity-related causes too far. It refers to a wide variety of issues, sure, and sometimes it's abused, just like "nazi" or "racist" or "leftist", but usually we know what people mean by it.

Of course, pretending not to is a way to try to remove power from the term. I understand that. However, that also serves to show that the term has power.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 04:10 AM   #573
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Yes, he was just insulting the guy. While some bullying certainly goes to the level of harassment, what he was doing didn't.
Insulting people is illegal in much of the world. The protection of honor is recognised as a human right. It is a curious deficiency of english law that this protection is missing.

Quote:
That's not akin to cutting someone out of your life. That would be analogous to getting up and leaving the performance. Kicking him off stage is analogous to cutting him out of other people's lives.
It's more analogous to a teacher sending someone out who uses insults.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 04:20 AM   #574
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
Insulting people is illegal in much of the world.
That's insulting.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 04:58 AM   #575
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's insulting.
I can see that englishmen might take offense at the statement that english law is deficient. Well... now what?
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:14 AM   #576
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
I can see that englishmen might take offense at the statement that english law is deficient.
See, that's very disappointing. Given that I made the effort to quote only the part I was responding to, I would've thought it would be obvious to you that I was responding to that part of your post and not another. And yet, you managed to interpret that I was doing otherwise, which serves only to fuel my perception that some posters here are disagreeing only for its own sake.

What I disagree with is that laws exist that make insulting each other illegal. Since offense and insult are taken and not given, and since they are entirely dependant upon the perception of the alleged victim, those are laws ripe for abuse, on top of being an infringement on freedom of speech.

As it stands, however, and despite me not addressing it earlier, I don't agree that's a deficiency of English law, as should now be obvious. Regardless, it's not "offensive" to me, nor am I an Englishman, nor do I live in a common law area.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:39 AM   #577
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
See, that's very disappointing. Given that I made the effort to quote only the part I was responding to, I would've thought it would be obvious to you that I was responding to that part of your post and not another. And yet, you managed to interpret that I was doing otherwise, which serves only to fuel my perception that some posters here are disagreeing only for its own sake.
Your post did not make sense. I saw three possible ways to reply:
1)Ask for clarification.
2)Explain how it does not make sense.
3)Interpret it in a way that does make sense.

Based on previous experience 1) seemed pointless. Of the remaining options 3) seemed to be the more polite one. Is that what you would have preferred or is there something I am missing?
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:41 AM   #578
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
Your post did not make sense.
How does it not make sense to say that laws making it illegal to insult others are insulting? Not only does it imply, somewhat humorously, that the laws should themselves be illegal because they insult me, but they also clarly state disagreement with the laws.

What part confused you?

Quote:
Based on previous experience 1) seemed pointless.
Since you seem intent on not understanding what's explained to you, I agree.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:41 AM   #579
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,333
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I ask again: is there any disagreement as to the nature of the joke? You seem to want to say yes in order to continue to disagree with me, but at the same time are unable to really do so.

Yes, there is disagreement about the nature of "the joke". You can find several versions of "the joke," but many here seem to refer to the version in the OP as "the joke". You appear to be so confused about this that you haven't even noticed, so I recommend that you follow the discussion to its sourcees.

Quote:
Then you are talking about a figment of your imagination.

No, I'm not. You are, however.

Quote:
Again, if you want to deal with your confusion, follow the discussion to its source. Your current behaviour indicates that your goal is simply to disagree with me, rather than actually clarify the things you seem to want to see clarified.

I'm not at all confused, but as usual you refuse to answer very simple questions.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:43 AM   #580
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,333
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
Your post did not make sense. I saw three possible ways to reply:
1)Ask for clarification.
2)Explain how it does not make sense.
3)Interpret it in a way that does make sense.

Based on previous experience 1) seemed pointless. Of the remaining options 3) seemed to be the more polite one. Is that what you would have preferred or is there something I am missing?

I think that it's clear to most other people that Belz is just equivocating.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:48 AM   #581
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
How does it not make sense to say that laws making it illegal to insult others are insulting? Not only does it imply, somewhat humorously, that the laws should themselves be illegal because they insult me, but they also clarly state disagreement with the laws.
An insult is an attack on someone's honor. Laws against insults are objectively not insulting.
I can understand that you feel that they are outrageous. But being outraged is not the same as being insulted.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:48 AM   #582
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Yes, there is disagreement about the nature of "the joke". You can find several versions of "the joke," but many here seem to refer to the version in the OP as "the joke". You appear to be so confused about this that you haven't even noticed, so I recommend that you follow the discussion to its sourcees.
What are you blabbering about? The joke was posted here. There has been no disagreement as to its content or meaning. I asked you several times about this and so far, after several attempts, the best you've managed is a weak 'yes' followed by a personal attack rather than a support for that claim. It seems to me that you've simply staked a position on this issue but are not really sure why.

Quote:
No, I'm not. You are, however.
You are contradicting yourself now, presumably because you can't not disagree with me. You just said I was taking someone's claim for granted, which is false, and now you're saying that I'm not, and that I'm instead making stuff up about it. Which is it?

Quote:
I'm not at all confused, but as usual you refuse to answer very simple questions.
I've stated exactly why I refused to answer it: because it's trivial for you to look back and follow what was the thing being discussed. It's one thing to request clarification. It's another thing entirely to not pay attention and then demand that everything be explained to you again.

The claim is simply GnaGnaMan's statement that he didn't understand the point. I said that his claim that he didn't is not a fact. You confused that with something else. It's really that simple. If you had bothered to even read a few posts back up that discussion, it would've been obvious but you prefered to be combative about it.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 05:53 AM   #583
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
An insult is an attack on someone's honor.
Is that the definition? I doubt it very much. I'm very iffy on the concept of honor. Can you define honor in legal terms? It's not a concept that's even had any impact in my life, and yet I've been insulted a few times, so you'll forgive me if I don't normally associate the two. When people speak of honor I think of Klingons in Star Trek.

Originally Posted by dann View Post
I think that it's clear to most other people that Belz is just equivocating.
Equivocating? What's unclear or ambiguous about saying that a law about insults is insulting?

Also, don't presume to speak for other people. It's presumptuous and self-serving.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 06:07 AM   #584
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Is that the definition? I doubt it very much. I'm very iffy on the concept of honor. Can you define honor in legal terms? It's not a concept that's even had any impact in my life, and yet I've been insulted a few times, so you'll forgive me if I don't normally associate the two. When people speak of honor I think of Klingons in Star Trek.
As I said, protection of honor is a recognized human right. It is implemented by jurisdictions throughout the world. There's no problem with putting it into law.

The local definition of an insult is as an expression of disrespect. Slander and libel (or its loval equivalents) are also regarded as crimes against honor.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 06:09 AM   #585
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
As I said, protection of honor is a recognized human right.
Could you give me one example? I'm genuinely curious and confused about the concept in this context.

Quote:
The local definition of an insult is as an expression of disrespect.
That's how I understand it but I don't see what that has to do with honor.

Anyway, that's a minor disagreement so we can move on to bitch-slapping each other on more substantive issues if you want!
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 06:40 AM   #586
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Could you give me one example? I'm genuinely curious and confused about the concept in this context.
From The Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948:
Quote:
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
http://www.un.org/en/universal-decla...-human-rights/

Quote:
That's how I understand it but I don't see what that has to do with honor.

Anyway, that's a minor disagreement so we can move on to bitch-slapping each other on more substantive issues if you want!
In german legal scholarship, insults, slander and auch are called crimes against honor ('Ehrdelikte'). I am under the impression that seeing insults as an attack upon honor is an internationally common view.

The german government kindly provides english translations of various german law codes. Here is from the self-defense section of the criminal code:
Quote:
A person who, faced with an imminent danger to life, limb, freedom, honour, property or another legal interest which cannot otherwise be averted, commits an act to avert the danger from himself or another, does not act unlawfully, if, upon weighing the con icting interests, in particular the affected legal interests and the degree of the danger facing them, the protected interest substantially outweighs the one interfered with. This shall apply only if and to the extent that the act committed is an adequate means to avert the danger.
https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/e...tgb.html#p0177
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 07:09 AM   #587
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
That's very interesting. A genuine thanks.

So if a law calls me a poopyhead, it can attack my honor, then?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 07:28 AM   #588
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's very interesting. A genuine thanks.

So if a law calls me a poopyhead, it can attack my honor, then?
That would obviously be a human rights violation.
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 07:34 AM   #589
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 24,143
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
Based on previous experience 1) seemed pointless.
Isn’t that insulting?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 07:37 AM   #590
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Isn’t that insulting?
I demand satisfaction!
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 07:37 AM   #591
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,333
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
What are you blabbering about? The joke was posted here. There has been no disagreement as to its content or meaning. I asked you several times about this and so far, after several attempts, the best you've managed is a weak 'yes' followed by a personal attack rather than a support for that claim. It seems to me that you've simply staked a position on this issue but are not really sure why.

No, the joke wasn't published here. An alleged summary of the alleged joke was posted here. That you are unable to tell the difference makes it very difficult to have a discussion with you. This is a very different summary.

Quote:
You are contradicting yourself now, presumably because you can't not disagree with me. You just said I was taking someone's claim for granted, which is false, and now you're saying that I'm not, and that I'm instead making stuff up about it. Which is it?

Both.

Quote:
I've stated exactly why I refused to answer it: because it's trivial for you to look back and follow what was the thing being discussed. It's one thing to request clarification. It's another thing entirely to not pay attention and then demand that everything be explained to you again.

I asked you a very simple question about your own claim. I didn't ask you to summarize the thread. You're the one who don't know what has been discussed.

Quote:
The claim is simply GnaGnaMan's statement that he didn't understand the point. I said that his claim that he didn't is not a fact. You confused that with something else. It's really that simple. If you had bothered to even read a few posts back up that discussion, it would've been obvious but you prefered to be combative about it.

In your belligerence you haven't even noticed that there are several versions of the alleged one joke.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 07:40 AM   #592
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by dann View Post
No, the joke wasn't published here. An alleged summary of the alleged joke was posted here.
A pointless distinction. There is no disagreement as to the nature of the joke. You've still not shown any.

Quote:
Both.
Then you are arguing for a contradiction. Do you think that is rational?

Quote:
I asked you a very simple question about your own claim. I didn't ask you to summarize the thread.
Well hopefully now it's cleared up, yes?

Quote:
You're the one who don't know what has been discussed.
Sorry, "I know you are but what am I?" is not a valid argument.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 08:03 AM   #593
GnaGnaMan
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,376
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Isn’t that insulting?
I suggested he wouldn't answer a question. Is that an expression of disrespect?
__________________
It makes no difference whatever whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again. -Hitler
GnaGnaMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 08:30 AM   #594
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 43,197
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
It was linked earlier in this thread. You commented on it. Your evasions are becoming egregiously disingenuous at this point.
WRONG. In that video no one ever says that the joke was not the reason why he got booted. Try again.
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 08:32 AM   #595
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 24,143
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
I suggested he wouldn't answer a question. Is that an expression of disrespect?
An affront to his honour and gross violation of his human rights, sir!
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 08:33 AM   #596
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 43,197
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
Without their precious persecution complex, the right wingers have nothing.

"I'm being oppressed!". Laughable.

The free market has decided that your so called "jokes" just aren't funny. Deal with it, snowflakes.
If only this was simply about jokes not being funny. If only.
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 08:39 AM   #597
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,926
Originally Posted by GnaGnaMan View Post
I can see that englishmen might take offense at the statement that english law is deficient. Well... now what?
Now you apologize, since giving offense is something you try to avoid, and regret when you do it?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 08:41 AM   #598
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 43,197
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
That's just laughable. So she's lecturing us about the original use of the word. So what? Just because the word has a different ethymological origin, doesn't mean anything. That the word has more than one use means that in popular use, it went through a mutation and acquired a different meaning. Lots of words have more than one meaning anyway. It's not like one word always has one and only one meaning. But anyway, these kinds of transformations happen all the time with language, because language is a living organism that is constantly changing. Words get modified, sometimes even borrowed from other languages, etc.

So as an educational trivia, it's interesting. But it's completely irrelevant. It just means that the word had a different meaning in the technical jargon of psychology, but in the popular use, it acquired a different one. The only thing that's important is that when a situation occurs when a person tells another one that they got triggered, both persons know what they mean by the word in the context of the current discussion. But again, there's nothing incorrect about a word having acquired more than one meaning. The word "Troll" is a good example. We use the word with a very different meaning than the original one. But we all know what we mean when we say someone's a Troll. No one ever goes "What? What do you mean he's a Troll? I thought Trolls didn't exist in real life, and only in fantasy books!". So replying to someone saying "You're being a troll" with "Actually, for your information, that word doesn't originally mean what you think it means. The word Troll originally means a mythological giant creature, etc" is, ironically, exactly the kind of "higher-than-thou","let-me-educate-you" pedantic responses from people who typically (while not always) tend to fall within the categories of Social Justice Warriors.

And it is clear that the writer of that article is very triggered
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan

Last edited by Ron_Tomkins; 11th January 2019 at 09:19 AM.
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 09:07 AM   #599
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 77,081
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
That's just laughable. Just because the word has a different ethymological origin, doesn't contradict the fact that in popular use, the word went through a mutation and acquired a different meaning. Lots of words have more than one meaning anyway. It's not like one word always has one and only one meaning. But anyway, these kinds of transformations happen all the time with language, because language is a living organism that is constantly changing. Words get modified, sometimes even borrowed from other languages, etc.
If one wants to complain about those using "triggered" to laugh at far-lefties, they should consider that these same 'victims' were the first to use it, but seriously. It started, to my knowledge, when someone claimed to have PTSD from Twitter and to be 'triggered' by some mundane nonsense.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2019, 09:18 AM   #600
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 43,197
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
If one wants to complain about those using "triggered" to laugh at far-lefties, they should consider that these same 'victims' were the first to use it, but seriously. It started, to my knowledge, when someone claimed to have PTSD from Twitter and to be 'triggered' by some mundane nonsense.
It is really interesting, though, because I'm realizing through this conversation that there's a group of people for whom language has this almost Religious Sacred connotation. So, using certain words like "black", "gay", etc, is sacrilegious. Or then, using the "wrong definition" of a word (like "triggered") is also a no-no. There's this very dysfunctional attitude toward language as if language was this Sacred thing you're not supposed to play around with. It's a very conservative and, frankly, plain dumb way of dealing with language.
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.