Cristobal to Da U

18in32 said:
Ignoring his post would not be a fight and you would not have died. But responding to his post by complying means you engaged and lost.

OK, now it sounds like we're blowing this out of proportion. But the claim of 'being offended' has come to be a technique of shaping debate to subtly alter public norms. I like the poster who objected, and I'm sure he's motivated by a good faith interest in autistic people he knows (maybe himself, I don't know). But you shouldn't have changed your post IMHO.
Click to expand...

In other words you think it’s acceptable to mock children with an inherited cognitive disorder by using disparaging and derogatory phrases? And StingTalk should be publicly known for that?

Aren’t you a winner. Do you also make fun of the Publix baggers who have autism and Down Syndrome?
 
gtphd said:
In other words you think it’s acceptable to mock children with an inherited cognitive disorder by using disparaging and derogatory phrases? And StingTalk should be publicly known for that?

Aren’t you a winner. Do you also make fun of the Publix baggers who have autism and Down Syndrome?
Click to expand...
Who said they were children? Does autism go away at 18?
 
gtphd said:
In other words you think it’s acceptable to mock children with an inherited cognitive disorder by using disparaging and derogatory phrases? And StingTalk should be publicly known for that?

Aren’t you a winner. Do you also make fun of the Publix baggers who have autism and Down Syndrome?
Click to expand...
Hmmm... when is mockery OK? I guess I'd say it's OK to mock an anonymous group of people, regardless how innocent or virtuous or sympathetic they are. Hence priests, rabbis, nuns, children, Holocaust victims, you name it, are all fair game.

And I'd say it's not so OK if the mockery is individualized or designed to deride a specific person known to the audience hearing the joke. Of course, if it's a public person or a politician or a really bad football coach, that might be OK anyhow.

So I suppose by that rationale I think you mocking me as not being a 'winner' was offensive and I wish you would remove it from your post.
 
Last edited:
The name Cristobal sounds like a really fancy gay hair dresser in Miami that charges a grand per head. Like “girl where did you get your hair done?” “Oh this is Cristobal” and the other girls in the group gasp.
 
18in32 said:
Ignoring his post would not be a fight and you would not have died. But responding to his post by complying means you engaged and lost.

OK, now it sounds like we're blowing this out of proportion. But the claim of 'being offended' has come to be a technique of shaping debate to subtly alter public norms. I like the poster who objected, and I'm sure he's motivated by a good faith interest in autistic people he knows (maybe himself, I don't know). But you shouldn't have changed your post IMHO.
Click to expand...
Stop being autistic, you prick.
 
gtphd said:
In other words you think it’s acceptable to mock children with an inherited cognitive disorder by using disparaging and derogatory phrases? And StingTalk should be publicly known for that?

Aren’t you a winner. Do you also make fun of the Publix baggers who have autism and Down Syndrome?
Click to expand...
I still think one of the funniest things I've ever seen was a HD employee jumping in front of my car as I was driving in front of the store, doing a full rock out pose to air guitar head banging move, then casually turn and keep walking across the parking lot. I laugh every time I think about that day and I don't care if you think that makes me a bad person. It was funny dammit.
 
Akinji07 said:
The name Cristobal sounds like a really fancy gay hair dresser in Miami that charges a grand per head. Like “girl where did you get your hair done?” “Oh this is Cristobal” and the other girls in the group gasp.
Click to expand...
It sounds to me like a jokester impersonating an uneducated person saying 'crystal ball.'
 
18in32 said:
Hmmm... when is mockery OK? I guess I'd say it's OK to mock an anonymous group of people, regardless how innocent or virtuous or sympathetic they are. Hence priests, rabbis, nuns, children, Holocaust victims, you name it, are all fair game.

And I'd say it's not so OK if the mockery is individualized or designed to deride a specific person known to the audience hearing the joke. Of course, if it's a public person or a politician or a really bad football coach, that might be OK anyhow.

So I suppose by that rationale I think you mocking me as not being a 'winner' was offensive and I wish you would remove it from your post.
Click to expand...
Most of the time people who mock other people suffer from an inferiority complex. The mocking makes them feel better about their own inadequacies.
 
Akinji07 said:
The name Cristobal sounds like a really fancy gay hair dresser in Miami that charges a grand per head. Like “girl where did you get your hair done?” “Oh this is Cristobal” and the other girls in the group gasp.
Click to expand...
"Ugh....girl....who DID this to you? Stephan, cancel the rest of my appointments today. We have a crisis" Cristobal
 
Nehru Jacket said:
Most of the time people who mock other people suffer from an inferiority complex. The mocking makes them feel better about their own inadequacies.
Click to expand...
So. I got a tiny little peener. So?
 
18in32 said:
It sounds to me like a jokester impersonating an uneducated person saying 'crystal ball.'
Click to expand...
Ed Orgeron saying 'crystal ball' which is ironic if he's the replacement at Oregon because he'll pronounce that how his last name is spelled.
 
18in32 said:
So I suppose by that rationale I think you mocking me as not being a 'winner' was offensive and I wish you would remove it from your post.
Click to expand...

You’re a douchbag by choice. Someone with a cognitive disability by birth does not have that choice. It’s not OK to mock someone with a cognitive disability because they act different, which is exactly what the posters in here are doing. That seems like an obvious distinction.
 
gtphd said:
You’re a douchbag by choice. Someone with a cognitive disability by birth does not have that choice. It’s not OK to mock someone with a cognitive disability because they act different, which is exactly what the posters in here are doing. That seems like an obvious distinction.
Click to expand...
But we aren't making fun of them. We are making fun of you.
 
MidnightJacket said:
We all talked öööö like this about Clemson with Clemsoning and Dabo being a clown too less than a decade away from them winning a couple nattys and putting their program in the same conversation with Bama. This isn't Miami making 1 good hire. This is Miami, who already sits in a hot bed of talent and already picks up relatively good recruiting classes and is already solidly funded, making great hires at AD, HC, and adding an additional 20-30 million to their program annually. Miami is committing itself to stepping it up, no gaurantee it happens, but they're laying a good foundation to back up their expectations. Clemson showed that proper funding is the foundation to building a successful program. Georgia Tech's movers and shakers better be paying attention and making plans to figure out how we can do the same.
Click to expand...
So when we call someone a clown that doesn’t mean he’s really a clown?

Fascinating.
 
Last edited:
gtphd said:
You’re a douchbag by choice. Someone with a cognitive disability by birth does not have that choice. It’s not OK to mock someone with a cognitive disability because they act different, which is exactly what the posters in here are doing. That seems like an obvious distinction.
Click to expand...
It's not OK to mock someone but it is OK to mock a category of someones, because it's individuals not groups that have feelings, interests and rights. So I would join you if savbandjacket were mocking an autistic child of your common acquaintance... but no, the group in the abstract gets no special treatment.

Meanwhile, you continue to mock me while thinking yourself morally superior to me. Hmm.
 
18in32 said:
It's not OK to mock someone but it is OK to mock a category of someones, because it's individuals not groups that have feelings, interests and rights. So I would join you if savbandjacket were mocking an autistic child of your common acquaintance... but no, the group in the abstract gets no special treatment.

Meanwhile, you continue to mock me while thinking yourself morally superior to me. Hmm.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t even mocking them. I was commenting on their predilection and ability to drill down on random data as a hobby of sorts. Like the guys who used satellite data and star patterns to track down that Trump flag that Shia LaBeouf kept putting up just for the sake of doing it and called it weaponized autism.
 
savbandjacket said:
I wasn’t even mocking them. I was commenting on their predilection and ability to drill down on random data as a hobby of sorts. Like the guys who used satellite data and star patterns to track down that Trump flag that Shia LaBeouf kept putting up just for the sake of doing it and called it weaponized autism.
Click to expand...
I think it's equivalent to the difference between assault and battery. You stamped the ground really close to his toes.

And PS, I'm not even trying to say you should make autism jokes (I don't). I am definitely saying you should not let abstracted objections of 'being offended' stop you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top