Red Mosquito

Mickey wrote:

washing machine wrote:

Mickey wrote:

washing machine wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:I wonder what conservatives think about last night. Is Will Smith a hero for fulfilling the role of patriarch and defending his family? Is Chris Rock just another victim of cancel culture and the loony left's policing of language? Is the whole thing a big pedophile celebration? Much to consider.

who cares what they think?

I'm curious about it, the same way I was curious how they wrapped their brains around when Lia Thomas lost to another trans swimmer (female to male). It is interesting to watch an incoherent ideological framework try to assimilate something that exceeds their grasp, on a logical level, and to see how they manage the cognitive dissonance these events introduce.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com ... it-coming/

That makes sense coming from Rod, but he doesn't represent all conservatives. He doesn't speak for his people.

Oh, you're looking for a Tucker C hot take, aren't you? I can't help you there.

Best I can do is my man Rod and also the conservative-adjacent folks over at reason.com

https://reason.com/2022/03/28/be-like-chris-rock/
https://reason.com/2022/03/28/will-smit ... ls-speech/

How will the broader conservative movement deal with this crisis.

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:No, that's not where we land.

we land on you're right, I'm wrong? whatever you want Mickey

Your summary of the above conversation is inaccurate.

you also had an inaccurate summary of my arguments

of course you're gonna say that; of course I'm gonna say that

who wins?

That's also not true--at no point did I attempt to summarize your argument beyond repeating your claim (that Will Smith smacking Chris Rock was an act of resistance, something you said in this very thread).

and I still stand by?

and you repeated to go "lol" and point out how ridiculous it was? it was one word; if you're upset by me interpreting your words and relaying what I understand of them back to you, maybe you'll accept that I might be upset that I typed a whole lot of stuff and you chose one word of it to isolate and mock

I used the word very consciously; it's a word I use when someone employs "violent" means to "punch up", as opposed to when someone is "punching down", or laterally; I don't think I have to explain those concepts to you, but this fight wasn't two men having a contest over the size of their dicks; if it was just that I wouldn't care

If you think I'm upset then you definitely do not have a handle on things here. I am merely pointing out that your summary--that we differ on "relative subjectivities"--is incorrect.

no, it's correct

I think I'm right

you think you're right

you trust the things behind your convictions; I trust the things behind mine

nobody alive or dead is gonna definitively prove either position

Ms Harmless wrote:I've seen Will's speech and my position has got stronger, not changed

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:I've seen Will's speech and my position has got stronger, not changed

Great news: the position that I publicly, vocally, and sentimentally committed to has not been altered by additional evidence.

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

spike wrote:whoever said ten pages ago that the joke was racially loaded, please explain yourself.

yeah, by using the actual text spoken, instead of grasping at straws

you mean how you used the actual text spoken?

yes

having the simplest and most lazily thought-through interpretation and extrapolation of the text possible is not the same thing

no... it was a simple, dumb joke, which can most easily be interpreted as a compliment.. and you're reading it as lashing out at the bald, black, female community.. i'm just confused how you got there

I don't give a shit how confused you are; things aren't wrong because they confuse you, Tree

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

Mickey wrote:No, that's not where we land.

we land on you're right, I'm wrong? whatever you want Mickey

Your summary of the above conversation is inaccurate.

you also had an inaccurate summary of my arguments

of course you're gonna say that; of course I'm gonna say that

who wins?

That's also not true--at no point did I attempt to summarize your argument beyond repeating your claim (that Will Smith smacking Chris Rock was an act of resistance, something you said in this very thread).

and I still stand by?

and you repeated to go "lol" and point out how ridiculous it was? it was one word; if you're upset by me interpreting your words and relaying what I understand of them back to you, maybe you'll accept that I might be upset that I typed a whole lot of stuff and you chose one word of it to isolate and mock

I used the word very consciously; it's a word I use when someone employs "violent" means to "punch up", as opposed to when someone is "punching down", or laterally; I don't think I have to explain those concepts to you, but this fight wasn't two men having a contest over the size of their dicks; if it was just that I wouldn't care

If you think I'm upset then you definitely do not have a handle on things here. I am merely pointing out that your summary--that we differ on "relative subjectivities"--is incorrect.

no, it's correct

I think I'm right

you think you're right

you trust the things behind your convictions; I trust the things behind mine

nobody alive or dead is gonna definitively prove either position

All conflict boils down to "I'm right, you're wrong," so yeah, sure, but if you can't name the particular points of disagreement then it's not correct in any meaningful sense.

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

spike wrote:whoever said ten pages ago that the joke was racially loaded, please explain yourself.

yeah, by using the actual text spoken, instead of grasping at straws

you mean how you used the actual text spoken?

yes

having the simplest and most lazily thought-through interpretation and extrapolation of the text possible is not the same thing

no... it was a simple, dumb joke, which can most easily be interpreted as a compliment.. and you're reading it as lashing out at the bald, black, female community.. i'm just confused how you got there

I don't give a shit how confused you are; things aren't wrong because they confuse you, Tree

You simply haven't explained yourself. You think people in power are constantly out to oppress and victimize vulnerable people, even when you don't have evidence. It's an unhealthy, unproductive worldview, and innocent (sometimes hilarious) people are getting physically assaulted by the likes of Will Smith, in the name of love, nonetheless, and somehow you've come out of this on the side of the victimizer. It's baffling.

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

tree_ wrote:

spike wrote:whoever said ten pages ago that the joke was racially loaded, please explain yourself.

yeah, by using the actual text spoken, instead of grasping at straws

you mean how you used the actual text spoken?

yes

having the simplest and most lazily thought-through interpretation and extrapolation of the text possible is not the same thing

no... it was a simple, dumb joke, which can most easily be interpreted as a compliment.. and you're reading it as lashing out at the bald, black, female community.. i'm just confused how you got there

I don't give a shit how confused you are; things aren't wrong because they confuse you, Tree

You simply haven't explained yourself. You think people in power are constantly out to oppress and victimize vulnerable people, even when you don't have evidence. It's an unhealthy, unproductive worldview, and innocent (sometimes hilarious) people are getting physically assaulted by the likes of Will Smith, in the name of love, nonetheless, and somehow you've come out of this on the side of the victimizer. It's baffling.

a big strong man is not a "victimizer" for slapping another big strong man on the cheek; those powers are equal

washing machine wrote:Me, ms harmless and warehouse. An odd RM alliance that has never existed before and one that I'm not sure has an agenda or purpose beyond this thread.

Prepare for battle, mosquito swarm.