Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 48

Thread: Two lesbians attacked in London by teen perverts, the world offers its sympathy, and one of the victims chides the sympathy-givers for being bigoted

  1. #21
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7369
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,372
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    This crime was NOT an act of gay bashing or hatred of women.

    this is why youre not taken seriously.

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: It’s hard to get a person who never could see to recognize how ugly they are.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  2. #22
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    I'll ask the question again:

    Let's say these hooligans were exactly the same, except they were gay instead of straight.

    And let's say they saw two men kissing on the bus and got turned on, and the same series of events occurred.

    Would this be a hate crime against males?


    Let's take it even further.

    Let's say these hooligans saw a man and woman kissing on the bus, and got turned on, and the same series of events occurred.

    Would this be a hate crime against heterosexuals?


    I'd like to understand how the victims being female and lesbian have anything to do with this being a hate crime. This was an attack against TWO PEOPLE (doesn't matter their gender or orientation) who wouldn't put on a sex show for 5 young perverts, who then attacked them for talking back to the perverts.

    NOT A HATE CRIME.

  3. #23
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Here are some actual examples of hate crimes:

    If the two women were beaten by homophobes who felt that lesbians should not kiss in public, because it's "unnatural" or "sinful", that would be a hate crime against lesbians.

    If a female firefighter were attacked because the attackers felt that firefighting is a "man's job" and they shouldn't doing it, that would be a hate crime against women.

    If a black person were attacked because a racist simply hates black people and hates seeing them in pubic, that would be a hate crime.



    This is not a hate crime.

  4. #24
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Also it's pretty cool how all the SJWs outraged at my take on hate crimes are avoiding discussing the victim's public chiding of those giving her sympathy.

    No comment on that part?

    Why? Because it's indefensible and makes SJW identity politics look really bad?

  5. #25
    Diamond Hockey Guy's Avatar
    Reputation
    1233
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    7,629
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy View Post

    For such a smart guy, you're a fucking idiot.
    I'm a "fucking idiot" for using common sense?

    If I'm a victim of a violent crime, is it oppression against Jews? Or is it just that I was a Jew who happened to get attacked?

    This crime was NOT an act of gay bashing or hatred of women.

    It was a case of pervs who were turned on by lesbians who felt they could intimidate some lesbians into putting on a show for them. This wasn't about hatred of anyone or any group. It was a crime of violence committed by young perverts.

    When you start turning this into another act in the Oppression Olympics, then you're misunderstanding the entire point of why there's a delineation between crime and hate crime.

    This was not a hate crime. There was no hate involved for any particular group.

    Sorry if this offends the PFA SJW contingent.
    Your sense isn't common at all.

    Just because your brain has processed the information that way doesn't make you right.

    Remember, your common sense told you that Roger Ailes didn't sexually harass Gretchen Carlson using the most fucked up logic ever heard. It made sense in your mind & your mind only & this is another situation where it only makes sense to you because you thought of it.

    Even after everything came out in the Ailes case you still insisted your logic was sound so what's the sense in even advancing a discussion when this is how your brain works.

    I guess anybody who disagrees with you is in the SJW contingent & that is why you're a fucking idiot.

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Druff is a savant in hearing which numbers are being touchtoned, but tone deaf to hearing when he’s being misogynistic.
    (•_•) ..
    ∫\ \___( •_•)
    _∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \

    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy
    I'd say good luck in the freeroll but I'm pretty sure you'll go on a bender to self-sabotage yourself & miss it completely or use it as the excuse of why you didn't cash.

  6. #26
    Platinum duped_samaritan's Avatar
    Reputation
    689
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,680
    Load Metric
    65690986
    They weren't harassing the lesbians because they wanted to get turned on. They were doing it because, for whatever reason, they thought it was ok to harass (and physically attack) lesbians simply for being gay.

    You've created quite a few threads like this that make it seem like you really just don't like lesbians.

    You need to calm down.

     

  7. #27
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by duped_samaritan View Post
    They weren't harassing the lesbians because they wanted to get turned on. They were doing it because, for whatever reason, they thought it was ok to harass (and physically attack) lesbians simply for being gay.

    You've created quite a few threads like this that make it seem like you really just don't like lesbians.

    You need to calm down.

     
    I don't have any problem with lesbians. Threads like these are almost always about specific people I feel are behaving badly, rather than lesbians as a group. Lesbians in general don't bother me at all, and I feel they should live life like the rest of us and be left alone.

    The boys who attacked these women did so because one of the women talked back to them. This wasn't a gay bashing attack. They said repeated rude things because they were turned on from seeing the women kissing, one of the women spoke up and told them off, and they reacted violently.

    These kids were awful and I want to see them prosecuted aggressively. No excuses for them, and 100% these women were victims.

    However, this still wasn't a hate crime. They weren't attacked for being gay. They were attacked for talking back to perverts who wanted to see them kiss more.

    Furthermore, I'm still not sure why nobody here wants to comment on the woman's nasty reaction to her sympathizers. That's the most interesting part of this story, and the only reason I created this thread in the first place. I saw this story a week ago before she wrote that editorial, and I didn't even find it interesting enough to post on PFA at that point.

  8. #28
    Platinum FRANKRIZZO's Avatar
    Reputation
    482
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    3,393
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Why can't we all just love each other for fucks sakes?

  9. #29
    Feelin' Stronger Every Day tony bagadonuts's Avatar
    Reputation
    558
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,517
    Load Metric
    65690986
    This is an interesting back and forth but ultimately it's a circle jerk. None of you can divine the intent of these attackers. Not Druff, not Hockey, not mumbler and not I. We can guess, but that's all it is so don't pretend you know because you don't.

    Maybe we'll get the "why" from the attackers eventually, but that cuts to the heart of the problem with the concept of hate crimes in general. What is the important societal factor here, the crime or the intent?

    These punks need to be prosecuted and the victims deserve justice. I'm not sure the why really matters in the grand scheme of things any more than the victim's commentary and critique thereof matters either.

     
    Comments
      
      Tellafriend: Totally cogent
      
      IamGreek: Man of Reason
      
      MumblesBadly: Dammit, Tony! Your intent here is clearly to distract from the oppression of the patriarchy!

  10. #30
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts View Post
    This is an interesting back and forth but ultimately it's a circle jerk. None of you can divine the intent of these attackers. Not Druff, not Hockey, not mumbler and not I. We can guess, but that's all it is so don't pretend you know because you don't.

    Maybe we'll get the "why" from the attackers eventually, but that cuts to the heart of the problem with the concept of hate crimes in general. What is the important societal factor here, the crime or the intent?

    These punks need to be prosecuted and the victims deserve justice. I'm not sure the why really matters in the grand scheme of things any more than the victim's commentary and critique thereof matters either.
    Fair point, and this is why I don't like hate crime legislation, even though I think hate crimes are reprehensible (and as a Jew, it's something on my mind when I attend public Jewish events or go to temple.)

    It's tough to ascertain what people where thinking when they commit their crimes. Additionally, I believe we should prosecute the crime itself, not the reason for the crime.

    I don't think a guy attacking me for being Jewish deserves a tougher sentence than someone attacking me to steal my wallet. It should be the same tough sentence either way.

  11. #31
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    With that said, when you're a victim of a crime and the world gives you an outpouring of sympathy, you need to be gracious and accept it.

    You don't lecture everyone about how bigoted they are.

  12. #32
    Canadrunk limitles's Avatar
    Reputation
    1650
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    In Todd's head
    Posts
    17,648
    Blog Entries
    1
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by duped_samaritan View Post
    They weren't harassing the lesbians because they wanted to get turned on. They were doing it because, for whatever reason, they thought it was ok to harass (and physically attack) lesbians simply for being gay.

    You've created quite a few threads like this that make it seem like you really just don't like lesbians.

    You need to calm down.

     
    I don't have any problem with lesbians. Threads like these are almost always about specific people I feel are behaving badly, rather than lesbians as a group. Lesbians in general don't bother me at all, and I feel they should live life like the rest of us and be left alone.


    .
    The boys who attacked these women did so because one of the women talked back to them. This wasn't a gay bashing attack. They said repeated rude things because they were turned on from seeing the women kissing, one of the women spoke up and told them off, and they reacted violently.

    These kids were awful and I want to see them prosecuted aggressively. No excuses for them, and 100% these women were victims.

    However, this still wasn't a hate crime. They weren't attacked for being gay. They were attacked for talking back to perverts who wanted to see them kiss more.

    Furthermore, I'm still not sure why nobody here wants to comment on the woman's nasty reaction to her sympathizers. That's the most interesting part of this story, and the only reason I created this thread in the first place. I saw this story a week ago before she wrote that editorial, and I didn't even find it interesting enough to post on PFA at that point.
    First of all I did react to one of the victims reaction to the press. And from what I read she is not
    the kind of person I would want to know


    "They weren't attacked for being gay. They were attacked for talking back to perverts who wanted to see them kiss more."

    You will not let go of your opinion that these boys were actually turned on from what they saw.
    How do you know what they were thinking?
    Does watching something you enjoy lead to public beatings?
    The facts are that they were five against two. Not two bodybuilding types but
    two females who would seem to provide a softer target

  13. #33
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by limitles View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    I don't have any problem with lesbians. Threads like these are almost always about specific people I feel are behaving badly, rather than lesbians as a group. Lesbians in general don't bother me at all, and I feel they should live life like the rest of us and be left alone.


    .
    The boys who attacked these women did so because one of the women talked back to them. This wasn't a gay bashing attack. They said repeated rude things because they were turned on from seeing the women kissing, one of the women spoke up and told them off, and they reacted violently.

    These kids were awful and I want to see them prosecuted aggressively. No excuses for them, and 100% these women were victims.

    However, this still wasn't a hate crime. They weren't attacked for being gay. They were attacked for talking back to perverts who wanted to see them kiss more.

    Furthermore, I'm still not sure why nobody here wants to comment on the woman's nasty reaction to her sympathizers. That's the most interesting part of this story, and the only reason I created this thread in the first place. I saw this story a week ago before she wrote that editorial, and I didn't even find it interesting enough to post on PFA at that point.
    First of all I did react to one of the victims reaction to the press. And from what I read she is not
    the kind of person I would want to know


    "They weren't attacked for being gay. They were attacked for talking back to perverts who wanted to see them kiss more."

    You will not let go of your opinion that these boys were actually turned on from what they saw.
    How do you know what they were thinking?
    Does watching something you enjoy lead to public beatings?
    The facts are that they were five against two. Not two bodybuilding types but
    two females who would seem to provide a softer target
    Yes, les, you were the only one to comment on that victim's nasty and ungracious editorial. I appreciate that you were willing to take on that topic, while the other lefties here are purposely avoiding it.

    Regarding the rest of what you say, you're correct that I can't say for certain what was in the boys' heads. However, as an outsider who has read the (likely accurate) reports of what occurred, it seems easy to ascertain that the boys were turned on watching the lesbians, thought they would intimidate the women into doing more of it, got sass mouthed (rightfully so) in response, and then attacked.

    I don't believe this was a veiled way to attack gays. These were idiot teenage boys. They aren't that complex. Usually what you see on the surface from them is what they really are.

    This was an obnoxious, violent, and reprehensible crime, and the women did not deserve it one bit. But it wasn't an attack on gays or women as a whole.

  14. #34
    Platinum GrenadaRoger's Avatar
    Reputation
    448
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,635
    Load Metric
    65690986
    hmmm, no posting in this thread by Lord of the Fraud
    (long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)

  15. #35
    Gold SPIT this's Avatar
    Reputation
    346
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,755
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Todd, if running PFA doesn't work out, you can always take a job writing the headline for the New York Post

  16. #36
    Diamond Hockey Guy's Avatar
    Reputation
    1233
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    7,629
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts View Post
    This is an interesting back and forth but ultimately it's a circle jerk. None of you can divine the intent of these attackers. Not Druff, not Hockey, not mumbler and not I. We can guess, but that's all it is so don't pretend you know because you don't.

    Maybe we'll get the "why" from the attackers eventually, but that cuts to the heart of the problem with the concept of hate crimes in general. What is the important societal factor here, the crime or the intent?

    These punks need to be prosecuted and the victims deserve justice. I'm not sure the why really matters in the grand scheme of things any more than the victim's commentary and critique thereof matters either.
    FTR, I never made any declarative statement, gave an opinion presented as factual or guessed the intent of the attackers in my posts.

    I'm not sure if Druff did any of these but since I called him a "fucking idiot" I'll guess that he did multiple times.
    (•_•) ..
    ∫\ \___( •_•)
    _∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \

    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy
    I'd say good luck in the freeroll but I'm pretty sure you'll go on a bender to self-sabotage yourself & miss it completely or use it as the excuse of why you didn't cash.

  17. #37
    Gold
    Reputation
    78
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,146
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Druff - I read her Guardian article. I don't think she is blasting those who give her sympathy as much as blasting the fact that the only reason *you* know about this, is because they are pretty harmless white lesbians. Druff, do you not disagree? Had this attack been something like 5 black guys, 2 black women, would we have heard this? We can change around the victim configuration, but in the end stuff like this is very real and it does impact lots of things. So SJW aren't even necessarily "warriors" as much as they'd just like people who were born into privilege to acknowledge the fact. She did have a couple lines about people from the past, which is kinda lame of her.

    As an example. I smoked some weed in my car in a state that it wasn't legal within past year. I got pulled over. I actually had no weed in my car, but it still reaked and perhaps I could get a DUI having just sparked up. I also had a rather large sum of money in my pocket due to a gambling related thing. Now, I don't think it would have been confiscated but this cop barely searched my car. He let me get out of the car. He didn't even pat me down. Then he did a minor search of my car for the weed and gave up while I was looking over his shoulder.... I have a strong feeling that if I had been black, or possibly just not white, things would have been handled differently. Granted, by then he had run my record and it is fairly clean and I was quite polite etc.

    So I realize that I likely benefitted from being white. Are you saying this is wrong for me to do? I don't even know if the cop is wrong for behaving in such a manner, but I could at least acknowledge I got a far easier pass and will. Does this statement anger you? I find it roughly equivalent to what the woman said...

  18. #38
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by donkdowndonedied View Post
    Druff - I read her Guardian article. I don't think she is blasting those who give her sympathy as much as blasting the fact that the only reason *you* know about this, is because they are pretty harmless white lesbians. Druff, do you not disagree? Had this attack been something like 5 black guys, 2 black women, would we have heard this? We can change around the victim configuration, but in the end stuff like this is very real and it does impact lots of things. So SJW aren't even necessarily "warriors" as much as they'd just like people who were born into privilege to acknowledge the fact. She did have a couple lines about people from the past, which is kinda lame of her.

    As an example. I smoked some weed in my car in a state that it wasn't legal within past year. I got pulled over. I actually had no weed in my car, but it still reaked and perhaps I could get a DUI having just sparked up. I also had a rather large sum of money in my pocket due to a gambling related thing. Now, I don't think it would have been confiscated but this cop barely searched my car. He let me get out of the car. He didn't even pat me down. Then he did a minor search of my car for the weed and gave up while I was looking over his shoulder.... I have a strong feeling that if I had been black, or possibly just not white, things would have been handled differently. Granted, by then he had run my record and it is fairly clean and I was quite polite etc.

    So I realize that I likely benefitted from being white. Are you saying this is wrong for me to do? I don't even know if the cop is wrong for behaving in such a manner, but I could at least acknowledge I got a far easier pass and will. Does this statement anger you? I find it roughly equivalent to what the woman said...
    Of course privilege exists, but the mistake comes from obsessing over it and feeling it needs to be completely equalized.

    It's not possible to do that.

    What about good looking people? They're born with privilege.

    What about very athletic people? They're born with privilege.

    What about smart people? They're born with privilege.

    What about kids from rich families? They're born with privilege.

    What about people born in first world countries? All of them are born with privilege over almost everyone in the third world.

    So if you get caught up in hating those with supposed "privilege", or hate yourself for it, then you're ust going into a cycle of negativity in which there's no exit or solution.

    In some cases, the privilege isn't even uniform. For example, there are definitely privileges one experiences in life for being born male, but also privileges for being born female. Do you think the males born in the late '40s and early '50s felt "privileged" to be drafted to go to Vietnam?

    The only thing she's correct about is that her situation got attention because both she and her partner are attractive white females. But as I mentioned before, that's a product of the media's longtime obsession with attractive/young/white damsels in distress -- NOT any sort of oppressive patriarchy. If I were kidnapped tomorrow, it would get zero media attention outside of poker. If a pretty 22-year-old female down the street got kidnapped, it would be all over the news. That's not the patriarchy at work.

  19. #39
    Gold
    Reputation
    78
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,146
    Load Metric
    65690986
    So you think they "obsess" over it, and those people think everyone is oblivious. Who is more correct? For some reason, I have a feeling when something happens to you, where you're treated better than an equivalent black person, you would never ever stop to consider such a thing.

    So what happens when people don't consider these things? Nothing changes. Myself, I'm rather ok looking. I realize how lucky I have it in that regard. I have a strong feeling more women have felt rejected by me than vice-versa. I can sure as fuck tell you it isn't due to my personality or charm. I was just born tall, white, and ok looking. So I am aware of it, and I think it makes me a better person to empathize with others. It gives people a more accurate view of the world when you realize your privileges along with the perspectives of other people. This is why I ultimately identify with being liberal, because it isn't just about me.

    Seriously, what do you have against empathy of these people? She was given a platform after the attack and thats what she chose to deliver. Are you upset at all she didn't play the victim card enough?

    So if you get caught up in hating those with supposed "privilege", or hate yourself for it, then you're ust going into a cycle of negativity in which there's no exit or solution.
    Or you can just not give a fuck, or you can actively fight with SJWs. IMO, you're actually worse than those that don't give a fuck. You actively fight people who bring this stuff to other's attention. Why? Aren't there numerous other things that should upset you? Do you feel under attack being white?

    Too much conservative media had made you buy into a victim status?

    The media is a reflection of what people care about. Contrary to all this shit you've heard on right-wing talk about "the media", it is largely a capitalistic endeavor that reflects the interests of their clients. *YOU* say all this comes about from the media, but I believe the media is just reflecting to us our fears and concerns.

    These women are trying to actually make the world a better place with penning that op-ed. What is your objective here?


    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by donkdowndonedied View Post
    Druff - I read her Guardian article. I don't think she is blasting those who give her sympathy as much as blasting the fact that the only reason *you* know about this, is because they are pretty harmless white lesbians. Druff, do you not disagree? Had this attack been something like 5 black guys, 2 black women, would we have heard this? We can change around the victim configuration, but in the end stuff like this is very real and it does impact lots of things. So SJW aren't even necessarily "warriors" as much as they'd just like people who were born into privilege to acknowledge the fact. She did have a couple lines about people from the past, which is kinda lame of her.

    As an example. I smoked some weed in my car in a state that it wasn't legal within past year. I got pulled over. I actually had no weed in my car, but it still reaked and perhaps I could get a DUI having just sparked up. I also had a rather large sum of money in my pocket due to a gambling related thing. Now, I don't think it would have been confiscated but this cop barely searched my car. He let me get out of the car. He didn't even pat me down. Then he did a minor search of my car for the weed and gave up while I was looking over his shoulder.... I have a strong feeling that if I had been black, or possibly just not white, things would have been handled differently. Granted, by then he had run my record and it is fairly clean and I was quite polite etc.

    So I realize that I likely benefitted from being white. Are you saying this is wrong for me to do? I don't even know if the cop is wrong for behaving in such a manner, but I could at least acknowledge I got a far easier pass and will. Does this statement anger you? I find it roughly equivalent to what the woman said...
    Of course privilege exists, but the mistake comes from obsessing over it and feeling it needs to be completely equalized.

    It's not possible to do that.

    What about good looking people? They're born with privilege.

    What about very athletic people? They're born with privilege.

    What about smart people? They're born with privilege.

    What about kids from rich families? They're born with privilege.

    What about people born in first world countries? All of them are born with privilege over almost everyone in the third world.

    So if you get caught up in hating those with supposed "privilege", or hate yourself for it, then you're ust going into a cycle of negativity in which there's no exit or solution.

    In some cases, the privilege isn't even uniform. For example, there are definitely privileges one experiences in life for being born male, but also privileges for being born female. Do you think the males born in the late '40s and early '50s felt "privileged" to be drafted to go to Vietnam?

    The only thing she's correct about is that her situation got attention because both she and her partner are attractive white females. But as I mentioned before, that's a product of the media's longtime obsession with attractive/young/white damsels in distress -- NOT any sort of oppressive patriarchy. If I were kidnapped tomorrow, it would get zero media attention outside of poker. If a pretty 22-year-old female down the street got kidnapped, it would be all over the news. That's not the patriarchy at work.
    Last edited by donkdowndonedied; 06-18-2019 at 09:36 AM.

  20. #40
    Feelin' Stronger Every Day tony bagadonuts's Avatar
    Reputation
    558
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,517
    Load Metric
    65690986
    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts View Post
    This is an interesting back and forth but ultimately it's a circle jerk. None of you can divine the intent of these attackers. Not Druff, not Hockey, not mumbler and not I. We can guess, but that's all it is so don't pretend you know because you don't.

    Maybe we'll get the "why" from the attackers eventually, but that cuts to the heart of the problem with the concept of hate crimes in general. What is the important societal factor here, the crime or the intent?

    These punks need to be prosecuted and the victims deserve justice. I'm not sure the why really matters in the grand scheme of things any more than the victim's commentary and critique thereof matters either.
    FTR, I never made any declarative statement, gave an opinion presented as factual or guessed the intent of the attackers in my posts.

    I'm not sure if Druff did any of these but since I called him a "fucking idiot" I'll guess that he did multiple times.
    Druff's entire OP was about intent and you took the opposing viewpoint.

    That's intent divination by proxy but I'm not busting your balls. I threw you in there as a shout out more than anything.

     
    Comments
      
      Hockey Guy: I accept your apology for mentioning me in the same sentence as mumblefuck.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 39
    Last Post: 04-07-2019, 09:08 PM
  2. Lesbians sue sperm bank because they didn't want a black baby
    By Dan Druff in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-03-2014, 06:35 AM
  3. the most bigoted person ever?
    By Steve-O in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-05-2014, 10:35 AM
  4. The victims that survived the attack in CO
    By GAMBLE-BOT in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-21-2012, 02:38 PM