Meeting People (1 Viewer)

[David Kronenbourg]

Oh yeah but if it was Fassblender doing it it would be ok!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Also it is actually legal to tell someone to go away.

Absolutely it is.
It also can be a great way of finding out if someone is an unstable dickhead.

 

[David Kronenbourg]

Oh yeah but if it was Fassblender doing it it would be ok!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I don't really think that. I just wanted an excuse to post that clip.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Oh yeah but if it was Fassblender doing it it would be ok!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Yup.

Dude is dreamy.

 

[hermie]

Haha, 7 trying desperately to make amends for his 'creepy' behaviour over on the Real Life Horn thread

I just think there are only so many articles like this that you can read (and this particular one refers to "men in general") before you start to feel affronted.

And Starbucks coffee is shit.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Well if we're talking broad strokes how about:

"Women dig confidence"

Because a woman I know who said this can speak for all women and "confidence" means the same thing to all people?

Joking aside, did you read the new york post article the guardian one linked to? I think the guardian one was necessary just to counteract the loathsomeness of it.

 

[ann post]

We are long past the point on internet awareness that people know that a madly objectionable article is worth more money than a whole pile of right-on. Especially where the new york post is concerned.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

And Starbucks coffee is shit.

I can't tell the difference between good or bad.

It depends on if the line in DD is shorter than the one in Starbucks

 

[nooleen]

Haha, 7 trying desperately to make amends for his 'creepy' behaviour over on the Real Life Horn thread

well actually he made amends by apologising instead of going on the defensive about how unfair it is to men for women to complain about creepy behaviour.

 

[Lili Marlene]

We are long past the point on internet awareness that people know that a madly objectionable article is worth more money than a whole pile of right-on. Especially where the new york post is concerned.

So these things should not be challenged because people already know they are madly objectionable and therefore they should just let them be madly objectionable?

TBH I just wanted to post the pick up artist fella's techniques in this thread. Might help with the meeting of people. Maybe train tickets should be integrated with tinder for those on the move?

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

I just think there are only so many articles like this that you can read (and this particular one refers to "men in general") before you start to feel affronted.

If it were telling you not to drink and drive would you be as affronted?

If you're not doing the behaviour, it's not about you.

 

[Lili Marlene]

If it were telling you not to drink and drive would you be as affronted?

If you're not doing the behaviour, it's not about you.

WEAR A FUCKING HELMET ALREADY, YOU'RE SETTING A BAD EXAMPLE

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

WEAR A FUCKING HELMET ALREADY, YOU'RE SETTING A BAD EXAMPLE

I hate them

 

[ann post]

So these things should not be challenged because people already know they are madly objectionable and therefore they should just let them be madly objectionable?

I suppose about 80% of my job is dealing with polarization.

Opinion A gets published. Opinion B counters. Parts of opinion A and B are bullshit. Calling out bullshit on A while not putting any analysis on B is bullshit, but calling bullshit on either side immediately makes people who agree with one side think you are aligned with the other, which is not the case.

 

[nooleen]

So these things should not be challenged because people already know they are madly objectionable and therefore they should just let them be madly objectionable?

the article had a good point about just that:

Douchebag supremacy is built on a long history of getting away with as much as possible – in finance, in romance, in literature, in humour, in politics, in the countless subtleties of simply taking up space in the world. If you can get away with it, good. More for you. Generosity and basic decency are favours, not obligations. It’s an isolating idea, the inverse of empathy. It’s also the reason why traditionally male-dominated communities such as gaming feel so threatened by female voices, and why progressive cultural critics are branded the “thought police”. Because getting away with it is getting harder all the time.

the kind of dudes (#notallmen) who impose themselves obnoxiously on women in public spaces might gradually start gaining some self-awareness if articles and discussions highlight their behaviour

 

[Lili Marlene]

I suppose about 80% of my job is dealing with polarization.

Opinion A gets published. Opinion B counters. Parts of opinion A and B are bullshit. Calling out bullshit on A while not putting any analysis on B is bullshit, but calling bullshit on either side immediately makes people who agree with one side think you are aligned with the other, which is not the case.

Well if we can get to the point where opinion B is allowed exist that'd be a start.

 

[hermie]

well actually he made amends by apologising instead of going on the defensive about how unfair it is to men for women to complain about creepy behaviour.

I didn't do that. Her interpretation of an interaction between two strangers was that it was creepy. If it genuinely was, that's fine but judging by the tone of the article I would not take it for granted that she isn't projecting in this instance.

And 7, she specifically refers to "men in general", i.e. me.

Think of the flipside to this reality. Interaction between randomers is outlawed, courting is not to be attempted outside of singles bars and dating websites. I'm not condoning creeping behaviour, particularly of the kind 7 described in his workplace, I abhor it. But I thought it wasn't about me if, like Ann Post, I didn't engage that sort of thing myself. But that's not true is it, I'm jumped on by nooly for having an opinion.

 

[nooleen]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[hermie]

Joking aside, did you read the new york post article the guardian one linked to? I think the guardian one was necessary just to counteract the loathsomeness of it.

Didn't read the other one so perhaps I'm lacking a frame of reference.

 

[ann post]

Well if we can get to the point where opinion B is allowed exist that'd be a start.

We are at the point where opinion B is allowed to exist. We know it exists because we have a link to it. We should not go toward the point where it cannot be analysed in any way at all without everyone immediately assuming that you agree with everything in column A because you analysed one part of column B. But that tends to be how people react to everything.