Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Commentaries on other forums, people, events etc.
Forum rules
1. No ad-hominem
2. No spamming or shilling
joe
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:48 pm
Great Britain

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by joe » Wed Mar 23, 2016 5:50 pm

Daniel Quinn wrote:
joe wrote:'Fuck off' I explained, with a twinkle in my eye.
Your ability to make a lucid point in 1 sentence appears to have disserted you ;)
Whilst your ability to use simple English words was never there in the first place. 'Disserted'?!

Art Vandelay
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:13 pm

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Art Vandelay » Wed Mar 23, 2016 5:50 pm

Daniel Quinn wrote:They cannot. They can have a homophobic tone but no joke ever discriminated against anybody . No joke ever refused to let you stay in a bed and breakfast. You can tell a joke in which homosexulaity is the target that does not make you homophobic.

All jokes have a target. Humour is not a manifesto of personal beliefs.

You need not of course find it funny.

Contrast what jammy said with say little Britain only gay in the village.
I obviously have a different view. To me, using homophobic phrases in a "joke" does not make them acceptable, regardless of whether they reflect the joke teller's beliefs or not.

User avatar
Lindsayt
Posts: 2376
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 9:06 pm
Marshall Islands

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Lindsayt » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:36 pm

Flatpopely and Ynwoan are welcome to come on here and respond to Jammy's provocative joke.


I've been accused of being gay several times in my life. In a way I sort of take it as a compliment that some people have thought that I'm gay. I certainly wouldn't get upset about whether anyone thought I was heterosexual or not.

Daniel Quinn
Posts: 6894
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:16 am
Nicaragua

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Daniel Quinn » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:05 pm

Art Vandelay wrote:
Daniel Quinn wrote:They cannot. They can have a homophobic tone but no joke ever discriminated against anybody . No joke ever refused to let you stay in a bed and breakfast. You can tell a joke in which homosexulaity is the target that does not make you homophobic.

All jokes have a target. Humour is not a manifesto of personal beliefs.

You need not of course find it funny.

Contrast what jammy said with say little Britain only gay in the village.
I obviously have a different view. To me, using homophobic phrases in a "joke" does not make them acceptable, regardless of whether they reflect the joke teller's beliefs or not.
you have moved the goal posts. Acceptable is a moral issue. They may not be acceptable to you. That does not make them homophobic.

I can appreciate they are not acceptable to you. The question is why should you impose your morality on everyone else.
Even a stroke didn't result in me liking AOS

User avatar
Dr Bunsen Honeydew
Posts: 26860
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:26 pm
Location: Muppet Labs
Great Britain

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:12 pm

Impose is a bit strong DQ, opinion expressed seems more appropriate. What must be understood is this forum will never practice political correctness, if someone deserve a pisstake no matter what sex, deviation, religion, politic, disability, colour then it will not be stopped. It stops at libel, fair comment is always acceptable here.

Art Vandelay
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:13 pm

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Art Vandelay » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:48 pm

Daniel Quinn wrote: The question is why should you impose your morality on everyone else.
I simply asked the Mods (not you) if they found Jammy's post acceptable as I do not.

User avatar
Dr Bunsen Honeydew
Posts: 26860
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:26 pm
Location: Muppet Labs
Great Britain

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew » Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:10 pm

Well the other three can make there own comment. Jammy is like a very strange antique Victorian piss-pot he will have his lovers and haters, but IMO he represents a large portion of normal people, who are with prejudices, with somewhat extreme views on many subjects. BUT in many ways in the living rooms of the UK he is probably more normal than we are.

Daniel Quinn
Posts: 6894
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:16 am
Nicaragua

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Daniel Quinn » Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:28 pm

Art Vandelay wrote:
Daniel Quinn wrote: The question is why should you impose your morality on everyone else.
I simply asked the Mods (not you) if they found Jammy's post acceptable as I do not.

You expressed the view that it was tired old unacceptable homophobia and suggested it should not be allowed. Seems to me that it is suggesting you have a superior moral view.

As it happens I consider jammys views unacceptable to me. I do not consider I have a superior argument that would justify censorship.
Even a stroke didn't result in me liking AOS

User avatar
Lindsayt
Posts: 2376
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 9:06 pm
Marshall Islands

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by Lindsayt » Wed Mar 23, 2016 11:39 pm

I'm happy to accept Jammy's post in this thread on this forum - in the context it was given in.

I can understand why other people would take exception to it, especially Flatpopely and Ynwoan.

But they're big boys. They're perfectly capable of standing up for themselves.

If they were to come on here and put together a coherent argument as to why Jammy's post should be removed, I may well change my mind and agree with them. But then again I may not. It would all depend what they had to say and how they said it, and on what counter-argument Jammy or anyone else could put against them.

User avatar
ArseHats
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:05 pm

Re: Audioflat Celebrations...!!!

Unread post by ArseHats » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:08 am

I agree that people should not be exempt from scrutinty or criticism simply because they happen to have, as one of the millions of characteristics that makes up every unique human being, one or more of the "protected charactersitics" defined in UK law (e.g. being old, being a transsexual person, being married or in a civil partnership, being pregnant or having a child, being of a particular race or religion, having a disability, being gay, etc.,...). But, to characterise someone on the basis of a single characteristic, especially when done in an obviously perjorative or critical way is something quite different to being at libetry to criticise that person in spite of that single characteristic.
"One whos head is so far up ones own arse that they are wearing ones arse as a hat"

Post Reply