Racism And The Cumberbatch Conundrum

[ThePompousPaladin]

Perhaps because they get offended they could be put in a different category , perhaps labelled special needs.

Bless you.

Another NSCer who pulls the victim card. Poor you.

 

[Soulman]

Bless you.

Another NSCer who pulls the victim card. Poor you.

Remind me who plays the victim oh patronising one.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

Remind me who plays the victim oh patronising one.

you.

 

[looney]

You've earlier displayed your ignorance about 'spastics' - you thought they were mentally incapable. Why?
I can only presume seeing the amount of information that has been around about cerebral palsy, that you're happy in your ignorance. It would follow that you don't know much about the abusive undertones of the word 'coloured' either. Don't you think?

Why don't you run along and educate yourself? Rather than spouting arguments that promote bigotry.

It's the attitude of self entitled people like you, that as soon as you feel your rights are being impinged you pull the 'victim card', without a single thought to those they are designed to protect.
You're not the victim in this, and while the victims of your ignorance are recovering, we need some laws or education. And you're living proof that the education way hasn't worked.
I hope in my lifetime these laws can be rescinded, but while there are people like you spouting their ignorance, 'wha wha whaa, i can't use a word', we will need them.

Thank you for proving your willfully ignorant attitude by not researching how the word 'coloured' is viewed as offensive by blacks. You are happy in your ignorance. Notice i haven't waved any statistics in your face - you can google them yourself, it's not my job to educate you.

Lastly, your arguments keep coming back to those who put these rules in place, you seem to have a beef with them and their 'political agenda'. This i do find interesting and might be something we can agree on. Can you explain more about what you think this political agenda is?

Its like you have created your own enemy, defeated it and claimed victory. The issue is not spastics per see its speach codes? Remember? You seem to conviniantly dodge the points I make.

I see you feel the need to change the subject again to one of victimhood. Im not claiming to be a victim, but... how do you know I am not disabled? Your not smart enough to project issues on me sunshine.

You are like ten a penny political narcassists that you get on line. You preach on the pretence you have the moral high ground. People disagree with you so you patronise them, then "oh shock and horror" they come back with arguments that suggest they have a point and yours are lacking in foundation...so you insult them... all the time claiming they are the ones becoming a bit leery and you are doing it on "Behalf of others"(unnamed and unsubstansiated .)

The origial topic was about Cumberpatch putting peoples noses out of joint about the term coloured, i have responded to that as well as providing a historiacl narrative, you are going of on a tangent. Get a grip and try to prove you have something more than a room temperature IQ and unresolved psyciatric issues,.

 

[Soulman]

you.

Really. This thread is about those that got offended. I was not offended, so how am i a victim, just a lame accusation by you. You obviously feel a victim, or more likely feel offended for the "victims".....poor you.

 

[Soulman]

Its like you have created your own enemy, defeated it and claimed victory. The issue is not spastics per see its speach codes? Remember? You seem to conviniantly dodge the points I make.

I see you feel the need to change the subject again to one of victimhood. Im not claiming to be a victim, but... how do you know I am not disabled? Your not smart enough to project issues on me sunshine.

You are like ten a penny political narcassists that you get on line. You preach on the pretence you have the moral high ground. People disagree with you so you patronise them, then "oh shock and horror" they come back with arguments that suggest they have a point and yours are lacking in foundation...so you insult them... all the time claiming they are the ones becoming a bit leery and you are doing it on "Behalf of others"(unnamed and unsubstansiated .)

The origial topic was about Cumberpatch putting peoples noses out of joint about the term coloured, i have responded to that as well as providing a historiacl narrative, you are going of on a tangent. Get a grip and try to prove you have something more than a room temperature IQ and unresolved psyciatric issues,.

Yep, well put.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

The origial topic was about Cumberpatch putting peoples noses out of joint about the term coloured, i have responded to that as well as providing a historiacl narrative, you are going of on a tangent. Get a grip and try to prove you have something more than a room temperature IQ and unresolved psyciatric issues,.

Your responses have been about disliking the people that put these laws in place. Nothing about the people that these laws are designed to protect.

In this thread you have shown your ignorance by claiming that black people aren't offended by the term 'coloured' and you have unwittingly proved the speech laws necessary by your ironic ignorance about 'spastics' - you thought and presumably still do that they are not mentally capable. You have insulted people with cerebral palsy and their families for not having the same viewpoint as you. You have also shown wilful ignorance on these subjects, claiming that the only way you'd know if the term 'coloured' is deemed offensive is if someone 'like me' told you.

Let me tell you now, that a significant number of black people find the identity 'coloured' as offensive. I have little doubt you will ignore this and carry on spouting paranoid bile about some mythical people that put these laws in place that you don't like. Thats ok, you're free not to like them, but don't take it out on vulnerable sections of society that speech laws are there to protect.

I don't think i have the moral high ground, but i do know that you have the moral low ground. Stop digging would be my advice.

I am still interested in your thoughts about what political agenda you think lies behind these laws? I have a feeling you'll say something utterly ridiculous, which will give many on this board another good laugh, but i am open minded that these laws do promote something other than protection for vulnerable and historically oppressed sections of society. Let me know if you have anything or is it just more wild and unsubstantiated opinion?

 

[W.C.]

Disabled people were not happy with the term spastic and it was changed. If the people of Pakistan are not happy with the shortening of the word, then perhaps they should change the name as well. Perhaps because they get offended they could be put in a different category , perhaps labelled special needs.
Your patronising replies i think "says a lot about you"

Paki was/is an insult in this country. Why are you trying to pretend it isn't?

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

Really. This thread is about those that got offended. I was not offended, so how am i a victim, just a lame accusation by you. You obviously feel a victim, or more likely feel offended for the "victims".....poor you.

You regularly pull the 'victim card' just look at most of your posts about muslims for examples.

 

[Soulman]

You regularly pull the 'victim card' just look at most of your posts about muslims for examples.

I don't agree with much about what is happening in the world involving Muslims, how is this pulling the "victim card", it is my opinion, using your theory anyone that disagrees is playing the "victim card", or the good old racist card.
Seeing as you only started posting a few weeks ago, you sure seem to know a lot, what was your previous/other account.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

Paki was/is an insult in this country. Why are you trying to pretend it isn't?

Because he doesn't have the self knowledge to realise that he's xenophobic and doesn't have the courage to address these issues of his.

 

[Soulman]

Paki was/is an insult in this country. Why are you trying to pretend it isn't?

Is Paki not short for Pakistan/Pakistani?, is it not the same as Pole, Brit, Scot, Argie, Fin, Czech, a shortened version. Only people offended for others that got the bandwagon rolling, like yourself.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

I don't agree with much about what is happening in the world involving Muslims, how is this pulling the "victim card"...

Soulman i would respect you if you came out directly with things, instead you hide a bigoted agenda because of our speech codes. This comes across as very snidey and cowardly.

You often pull the victim card as a way to put across your agenda, as i say, if you were direct, i'd have more respect for you.

 

[Soulman]

Because he doesn't have the self knowledge to realise that he's xenophobic and doesn't have the courage to address these issues of his.

Chuck in racist and the treble is up. That's all people like you have when anyone disagrees.....the fallback soundbites....pathetic.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

Is Paki not short for Pakistan/Pakistani?, is it not the same as Pole, Brit, Scot, Argie, Fin, Czech, a shortened version. Only people offended for others that got the bandwagon rolling, like yourself.

This is another post that proves your ignorance, and the implication that you care because you're a victim in this.
Poor you, having to change which word you use...

It must be really hard for you...

 

[Soulman]

Soulman i would respect you if you came out directly with things, instead you hide a bigoted agenda because of our speech codes. This comes across as very snidey and cowardly.

You often pull the victim card as a way to put across your agenda, as i say, if you were direct, i'd have more respect for you.

I don't care whether you respect me or not whilst hiding behind your patronising, insinuating posts. Take a step down from your self acclaimed moral high ground and take a look at yourself.
If you are unhappy with how i come across then so be it, i have not asked for your respect, so stop patronising.
I ask again, who are the "victims" of this thread.

 

[Soulman]

This is another post that proves your ignorance, and the implication that you care because you're a victim in this.
Poor you, having to change which word you use...

It must be really hard for you...

Funny how you state that any poster that disagrees with you is "ignorant" amongst other things. Still you have changed from insulting my family and upbringing and my mental health i suppose.

 

[looney]

Your responses have been about disliking the people that put these laws in place. Nothing about the people that these laws are designed to protect.

Wrong. We are discussing speach codes, not laws. Social or political agendas.

In this thread you have shown your ignorance by claiming that black people aren't offended by the term 'coloured' You have insulted people with cerebral palsy and their families for not having the same viewpoint as you. You have also shown wilful ignorance on these subjects, claiming that the only way you'd know if the term 'coloured' is deemed offensive is if someone 'like me' told you.

Some are not, i have yet to see you provide any data to suggest a significant amount of coloureds are upset by the term. Why dont you prove it?

Disagreeing with speech codes is not insulting people unless you are claiming some divine religious truth, get a grip dullard. I told you not to try to project conto me smallfry, I claimed no such thing.

Let me tell you now, that a significant number of black people find the identity 'coloured' as offensive. I have little doubt you will ignore this and carry on spouting paranoid bile about some mythical people that put these laws in place that you don't like.

OK I wont igore it I will address it. What is your source for this claim? Statistics? Proove it.

I don't think i have the moral high ground, but i do know that you have the moral low ground.

LOL same thing dipshit. Its not a moral argument its a political one over speech codes remember? When you moralise it is when you become enbibed with a type of inappropiate preistliness IOW a sanctimonious wanker.

I am still interested in your thoughts about what political agenda you think lies behind these laws? I have a feeling you'll say something utterly ridiculous, which will give many on this board another good laugh, but i am open minded that these laws do promote something other than protection for vulnerable and historically oppressed sections of society. Let me know if you have anything or is it just more wild and unsubstantiated opinion?

I am still interested in your thoughts about what political agenda you think lies behind these laws? ?

What laws?

I have a feeling you'll say something utterly ridiculous, which will give many on this board another good laugh, but i am open minded that these laws do promote something other than protection for vulnerable and historically oppressed sections of society. Let me know if you have anything or is it just more wild and unsubstantiated opinion?

Oh here we go, "all the lurkers support me". Why not post a poll and see then at least you can claim you have provided EVIDENCE. you know what that is?

Oh and slipped up slightly with the spastic reference. A minor point bu then this for me is a debate, it appears to be a vanity project for you. I dont mind beig wrong so lets see some more EVIDENCE.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

Funny how you state that any poster that disagrees with you is "ignorant" amongst other things. Still you have changed from insulting my family and upbringing and my mental health i suppose.

I'm not sure what we've disagreed upon in this thread.

But let me be clearer, you've proved your ignorance by claiming that the word 'Paki' isn't a racist slur, which it is.

Let me also be clear that i believe that your continuous xenophobic bile, particularly your anti-muslim posts around the time of Charlie Hebdo do have roots in a mental health issue for you, i think it's also likely that this poor attitude of yours in some part is attributed to your upbringing.

Do you really think your anti-muslim posts (at that time) were responsible or appropriate for a decent human being?

 

[Soulman]

I'm not sure what we've disagreed upon in this thread.

But let me be clearer, you've proved your ignorance by claiming that the word 'Paki' isn't a racist slur, which it is.

Let me also be clear that i believe that your continuous xenophobic bile, particularly your anti-muslim posts around the time of Charlie Hebdo do have roots in a mental health issue for you, i think it's also likely that this poor attitude of yours in some part is attributed to your upbringing.

Do you really think your anti-muslim posts (at that time) were responsible or appropriate for a decent human being?

You seem hell bent on insulting and attacking not my posts, but me. Easy behind a keyboard . You know nothing about me, my upbringing or my mind.
You overstepped the mark before with tasteless comments directed at me.....yet you are still getting away with it. Says more about the "snidey" and "cowardly" way you go about debating. I will not stoop to your level, so feel free eh.