Good Manners

I'm not saying posts won't elicit emotional responses or that people should be robotic and not have any.

I'm just saying, what good comes from page after page of angry back and forth banter over one person's real or fake life.
Here's a crazy notion. If all of this is so annoying and meaningless to you, you don't have to read it. You can go to the real world, where you'd be lacking the anonymity to say whatever you want, and you'd be responsible for your words and actions.
 
Here's a crazy notion. If all of this is so annoying and meaningless to you, you don't have to read it. You can go to the real world, where you'd be lacking the anonymity to say whatever you want, and you'd be responsible for your words and actions.

zing!
 
I've always wanted to try pheasant. I imagine it's just more of a dark-meaty chicken... but with spiffier feathers!! :D
 
I think I might have had pheasant...once...but it wasn't that memorable...if it was pheasant...

OK, this requires its own culinary kink thread.
 
I think I might have had pheasant...once...but it wasn't that memorable...if it was pheasant...

OK, this requires its own culinary kink thread.

This shit is getting too complicated. Let's just stick to steak and beer, pls.
 
I'm not interested in a dogpile either. This whole thread is tiring, but I just don't feel like pretending x is y. I have no interest in making anyone cry. I think I respond similarly to WD's Republican fantasies.

Word

I find her viewpoint horribly offensive, because, in pages past, she was basically saying "I kinda wish people like you didn't exist. And people like Netz. And Stella. And subbie men. And effeminate men." Etc. etc. etc.

Ok, I have not read her things as such, and I read a lot of it cause big surprise, I'm an OSG fan.

I don't really know what to tell you. I suppose you can either take trust that her intentions are honorable, you could ignore her, or you can discus it all with her. Just please be civil about it. If you are wondering why I care, she is a friend, and I don't stand by and watch friends get hacked to bits.

Here's a crazy notion. If all of this is so annoying and/or meaningless to you, you don't have to read it. You can go to the real world, where you'd be lacking the anonymity to say whatever you want, and you'd be responsible for your words and actions.

That is the golden truth right their. I wanna stamp that on a few peoples foreheads in here.
 
As to the "possibly infer a complete lack of tolerance for traditional males" statement, perhaps it would have been better worded that traditional males are accepted in certain circles of our society, but typically in media and academa which shapes public opinion, the traditional male role is usually cast as an oppressor and negatively almost all the time.

Rightwingers dominate talk radio, and Fox dominates cable "news." Evangelical Christianity dominates the public face of American religion, and has a stranglehold on the Republican Party - not to mention those who fill Evangelical pews.

I really tire of the ease with which people dismiss those voices are irrelevant, or lacking in influence on the opinions of the populace of this country.

Surely you don't mean to suggest that the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, James Dobson, the average preacher, or even the average elected official from a conservative district, have been casting aspersions on the traditional male role.

No I am not suggesting any such thing.

Then why do you dismiss their influence?

Because they happened to be conveniently absent when I am ordering food in the resturant.
But you dine with "media and academa" on a regular basis?

See the bold above. That's what I'm asking about. Why don't you include rightwing radio, Fox, and evangelical Christianity, among the forces influencing public opinion in this country?
 
But you dine with "media and academa" on a regular basis?

See the bold above. That's what I'm asking about. Why don't you include rightwing radio, Fox, and evangelical Christianity, among the forces influencing public opinion in this country?

This may belong in another thread, but I think people dismiss the influence of such entities because they present themselves as being constantly under attack. They cry (Glenn Beck) and whine (Sarah Palin) about how persecuted they are. And a bedrock of Christian belief is that these are the last days and they are singled out for heaps of opposition. In the religion of my youth, persecution was a "sign" that you were doing the right thing - it was proof that forces combined against you because God was on your side.

Labeling themselves as the underdog (not just the underdog, but a kicked, abused and victimized underdog), it may be hard for some to recognize that they have a lot of influence.
 
Ok, I have not read her things as such, and I read a lot of it cause big surprise, I'm an OSG fan.

I don't really know what to tell you. I suppose you can either take trust that her intentions are honorable, you could ignore her, or you can discus it all with her. Just please be civil about it. If you are wondering why I care, she is a friend, and I don't stand by and watch friends get hacked to bits.

I don't have the patience to go back and find all of her posts that I found frustrating and offensive to quote them here, so you're just gonna have to kind of take my word that that is how I read them. If she didn't mean to come across that way, then lemme tell ya... she really needs to brush up on her communication skills.

Do I hate osg? No. The thing is that I don't yet have reason to respect her.
 
This may belong in another thread, but I think people dismiss the influence of such entities because they present themselves as being constantly under attack. They cry (Glenn Beck) and whine (Sarah Palin) about how persecuted they are. And a bedrock of Christian belief is that these are the last days and they are singled out for heaps of opposition. In the religion of my youth, persecution was a "sign" that you were doing the right thing - it was proof that forces combined against you because God was on your side.

Labeling themselves as the underdog (not just the underdog, but a kicked, abused and victimized underdog), it may be hard for some to recognize that they have a lot of influence.
It's tough to rally the troops without a cause or enemy to oppose, and an enemy's only worth fighting if he's perceived as significantly threatening. It's not just the right. Creepy end times manipulations aside, the left presents itself as constantly under attack as well.

Well, maybe not with literal crying. Beck really is in a league all his own.

Anyway, I wonder if RJ used "shapes public opinion" as a synonym for "amplifies and aids the forces of social change." He dismisses the voices of conservatism or status quo as non-influential, because their influence is so thoroughly established that he doesn't even recognize it as a force. For a conservative Christian guy, they're the baseline, the "normal," the voice of the world as he knew it.
 
Last edited:
you let "musical" stand in the way of Catharine Zeta Jones and Queen Latifah?

Shame on you.

I've seen it already and while they're both gorgeous women and fine actors, I have a longstanding aversion to musicals and avoid them whenever possible.
 
I've seen it already and while they're both gorgeous women and fine actors, I have a longstanding aversion to musicals and avoid them whenever possible.
Now you're just sucking up to me...and you don't even know it. I've gotta offer you a beer.

That rack is an answer for everything. And those legs answer everything else.
You're such a horn dog, Stella! :p
 
Back
Top