The Controversial Discussions Thread (Was "The Prejudice Discussion Thread" (Was "The Human Sexuality Discussion Thread" (Was "The Homosexuality Discussion Thread"))) — Page 25

satisfied now?

Yes, there we go. ;)

Warbler said:

seriously,  can someone just ban this troll(thejediknightusezni) already?

I find him too amusing to want him banned.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Warbler said:

seriously,  can someone just ban this troll(thejediknightusezni) already?

I find him too amusing to want him banned.

Agreed. I would be more than willing to have him hold up his comments outside one of my funerals :-D

One of your funerals? How many are you planning to have?

All of them.

*rolls eyes*

Exidor says :

Both eyes come up six.

An Ork hatches from an egg and marries a girl from Colorado.

Bingowings said:

Exidor says :

Both eyes come up six.

A girl Ork hatches from an egg and marries a girl from Colorado.

 Given the thread this was posted in, I felt compelled to fix it for you.

Have you tried not being Homotextual?

Bump.

Actually I have a lengthy post in mind, but I don't have time to type it up.  In any case, numerous conversations that have taken place recently could easily fit in this thread.

Well yeah but they were in response to other posts in other threads where they were sort of originally on topic.

Thus exposing the pointless nature of this thread.

Homosexuality in of itself is hardly worth talking about.

Men and women of the same gender being drawn to each other with an end to getting theirs away with each other.

All the other talk has been about 'traditionalists' wanting to perpetuate some form of prejudice.

We don't have a thread of colour or a female thread for much the same reason.

There isn't much to having darker than Caucasian skin but you can write volumes about the prejudices it's evoked with a bit of assistance from interpretations of scripture.

Similarly we don't have a passive aggressive paranoiac's thread.

Bingowings said:

Well yeah but they were in response to other posts in other threads where they were sort of originally on topic.

Thus exposing the pointless nature of this thread.

Homosexuality in of itself is hardly worth talking about.

Obviously there is a great divergence of opinion, and it was consuming many other threads even when this thread was first started, making this thread anything but pointless, as all other threads could be freed up.

Men and women of the same gender being drawn to each other with an end to getting theirs away with each other.

All the other talk has been about 'traditionalists' wanting to perpetuate some form of prejudice.

We don't have a thread of colour or a female thread for much the same reason.

There isn't much to having darker than Caucasian skin but you can write volumes about the prejudices it's evoked with a bit of assistance from interpretations of scripture.

I think having a thread about racism would actually be valuable for discussion, especially if such a discussion took off elsewhere.  Racism is still quite extant, and its nature (and the subsequent abuse of the race card, the pros and cons of affirmative action, etc.) are actually quite valuable for discussion.  I don't know why you think it's not worth talking about.  I've seen such threads in other forums' Off Topic sections..

Similarly we don't have a passive aggressive paranoiac's thread.

 I want to address something, not just to you, but to everyone.  What I am about to say could hurt feelings permanently, but I think it's important to point out.  I have a suspicion that Warbler has an autism-spectrum disorder, perhaps what was until recently called Asperger's .  I got this list from a website:

ASPERGERS: CLINICAL FEATURES

One of the primary features of Aspergers is their passion for favorite topics or special interests. Some of these areas include:

• astronomy
• dinosaurs
• extraterrestrials
• geography
• history 
• machines or machinery
• maps
• math
• metereology
• music
• reading 
• science
• social studies
• space travel
• trains
• weather

I might suggest other topics like politics or sports.

Socialization deficits—

• Are inflexible and incapable of coping with change
...
• Difficulties making social connections
• Easily stressed and emotionally vulnerable
• Frequently described as “odd” or selfish
• Highly frustrated by their social awkwardness/alienation
• Lack effective interaction skills — not desire
• Lack understanding of human relations and rules of social convention
• Naïve and lack common sense
...
• Seldom interested in other's interests/concerns
• Unable to “read” others' needs and perspectives
• Unable to appropriately respond to social cues

How often have members here laughed at Warbler's inability to get an obvious joke or his taking things too literally or personally?

Social rejection of Aspergers kids—

Because of their social ineptness ASPERGERS kids are often the focus of bullying, scape-goating, hazing and teasing. This often leads to anxiety, feelings of rejection, depression and withdrawal.

...

For some teenagers, computers are an alternative from stressful social situations. Computers also provide a more linear, modulated form of socialization that ASPERGERS kids are more skilled and comfortable at handling. Since many ASPERGERS kids become very computer proficient, they become valuable resources to their peers. It also provides a media for social interaction in which they can feel competent and valued. 

...

Use of Language—

• Concrete language rather than abstract
• Difficulty understanding humor
...
• Typically revert to favorite topic area 

...
• Weak pragmatic-conversational-skills

TEACHING STRESS REDUCTION SKILLS—

AS kids are:

• are often anxious and worrisome
• easily overwhelmed 
• highly sensitive 
• often engage in rituals

I got these from this site.  I removed what I thought was not applicable in Warbler's case or was not available just by reading his computer posts.  You can see the whole list at the link.

I feel Warbler fits many of these criteria and have thought so for some time.  I didn't ever point it out because of my fear of hurting him and because I could easily be incorrect, as it's hard to judge a person by computer posts alone.  But I feel the need to point it out now as he is so often the subject of negative humor, yea, even what some might call prejudice.  Folks judge him without truly knowing him.  For this reason I again resort to this quote:

Similarly we don't have a passive aggressive paranoiac's thread. 

Since this quote is obviously referring to Warbler, let me again say that perhaps it is not a bad idea to have a thread devoted to the prejudices, bigotry, and mistreatment directed at those who have emotional, psychological, or personality disorders.  They too are victims, often completely without recognition.  I want everyone to consider just perhaps how hypocritical they may have been in their treatment of others, including Warbler, without understanding the hardships many of them go through.

My daughter has Asperger's...I hadn't heard that it isn't called that anymore.

It's a very recent change, just since the DSM-5 came out last year.  In this case it is mostly just a change in terminology, and certainly not binding.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/dsm-5/faq#changes

What I mean about not binding is that if identity includes Aspergers, a person is free to continue using the term without being incorrect.  It's probably more just an attempt to phase it out and user a broader definition for the whole autism spectrum.

BTW, my last long response wasn't the promised long response.  I haven't gotten to it yet.

As a former college RA and current high school teacher I've dealt with lots of self diagnosed Asbergers cases. Diagnosing a chum online seems a pretty questionable task, even with the best intentions.

Well, I admitted that I could easily be wrong for the very reasons you mentioned.  But if I am right, it might give folks a little more sympathy for Warbler, as I feel that people are unnecessarily harsh on him.  Even if he merits no such diagnosis, he clearly struggles with certain aspects of humor, and has a unique personality on this board.  It seems to me that implicitly calling him a passive aggressive paranoiac is the weightier sin, no?

lets talk heterosexuality. I don't want to sound like I'm bragging, but I once dated a female with an extremely similar libido and sexual response cycle. Otherwise I didn't fancy her too much. She was a bit dull, I hated her friends, and lets just say she wasn't on the Deans list. But we had simultaneous orgasms "like in the movies" I wrote in my journal at the time. At 21 that seemed profound enough to really try to stay with this girl. Reading my old journal got me thinking just how much movies affected my expectations about sex, well into adulthood.

darth_ender said:

Well, I admitted that I could easily be wrong for the very reasons you mentioned.  But if I am right, it might give folks a little more sympathy for Warbler, as I feel that people are unnecessarily harsh on him.  Even if he merits no such diagnosis, he clearly struggles with certain aspects of humor, and has a unique personality on this board.  It seems to me that implicitly calling him a passive aggressive paranoiac is the weightier sin, no?

 Fair enough

TheBoost said:

Reading my old journal got me thinking just how much movies affected my expectations about sex, well into adulthood.

Comic books did the same for me. My ideal woman at the time was one with a sleek, smooth body like this

I had trouble finding any women with any amount of body hair and less than perfect tits/ass attractive.

Suffice it to say, I've got a better/healthier taste in women now.

Darth Ender said :I think having a thread about racism would actually be valuable for discussion, especially if such a discussion took off elsewhere.  Racism is still quite extant, and its nature (and the subsequent abuse of the race card, the pros and cons of affirmative action, etc.) are actually quite valuable for discussion.  I don't know why you think it's not worth talking about.

This isn't the Prejudice thread. It's the Homosexuality Discussion Thread.

Homosexuality has one or two points of interest (it's effects on other social interactions and the nature/nurture/choice aspect which could be applied to half a dozen other subjects too).

It's like having a thread about hair colour. You can talk about it for one or two pages, post some comparison pictures and that's the whole subject covered until someone brings up discussions about discrimination (ginger hair, Afro hair etc).

So really the topic is prejudice and in a Biblical sense God has made His announcement so all believers are charged to judge the deed which defines the variance as wrong (though not all Christians do as not all Christians believe the Bible to be literally true from cover to cover).

This was the distinction I was trying to draw.

Warb would never stone anyone to death. He might stone a mouse and quote himself doing it on a loop, but not a dog and not a gay man.

If Warb has Aspergers he has a duty to himself to either announce it when he is posting in a counter social manner, grow a thick skin or just not post.

He says he has 'anger issues' but that's not the same thing. He would require a professional diagnosis which might get him useful help to fulfill his greater goals (companionship, greater autonomy, clearer communication) if that's the case.

We have a number of people on here who have posted that they have Aspergers and people who have previously mocked the bizarre nature of some of there postings have backed down.

I do notice Warb's posts often go from being almost painfully polite and mannered on the top half to being in caps and full of quality swears, exclamations and typos on the bottom half. He also likes to hide slightly veiled digs at people he feels slighted by (not just me) in his signatures. These are typical passive-aggressive behaviours.

He is also clearly and unjustifiably paranoid.

It's no insult to have mental health issues and if that is the case with Warb and others ignoring them doesn't do Warb any good, it doesn't do anyone any good. But if that's not the case it's just emotional flatulence and should stop or happen somewhere where that sort of attention might be more welcome.

Arguably some of my posts could be interpreted as counter-social but I am not a diagnosed sufferer of any mental illness or personality disorder.

Any problem you have with what I say you can criticise with confidence.

Though my interest do include :

• astronomy
• dinosaurs
• extraterrestrials
• geography
• history 
• machines or machinery
• maps
• maths
• meteorology
• music
• reading 
• science
• social studies
• space travel
• trains
• weather

I've changed the thread title to indicate that this is now a thread for the discussion of human sexuality in general, and not just homosexuality (though, implicitly, discussion on non-homosexual sexuality was always allowed here).

Is this thread less pointless, now?

Bingowings said:

All the other talk has been about 'traditionalists' wanting to perpetuate some form of prejudice.

Similarly we don't have a passive aggressive paranoiac's thread.

I appreciate the honesty of your opinion but these comments are a somewhat exaggerated version of what was actually said and reiterated for you and others many times. 

Opinion and truth are quite different beasts,  you judging them, makes you no better than you say they are.

A lesson we all need a reminder of from time to time.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I've changed the thread title to indicate that this is now a thread for the discussion of human sexuality in general, and not just homosexuality (though, implicitly, discussion on non-homosexual sexuality was always allowed here).

Is this thread less pointless, now?

While I appreciate the effort I still don't think sexuality as a subject has legs. Some people want to put something there, one here, some nowhere, some anywhere.

Prejudice is a topic we could all relate to as we have probably suffered it or witnessed it or engaged in it.

Jetrell Fo said:

Bingowings said:

All the other talk has been about 'traditionalists' wanting to perpetuate some form of prejudice.

Similarly we don't have a passive aggressive paranoiac's thread.

I appreciate the honesty of your opinion but these comments are a somewhat exaggerated version of what was actually said and reiterated for you and others many times. 

Opinion and truth are quite different beasts,  you judging them, makes you no better than you say they are.

A lesson we all need a reminder of from time to time.

There is a very small spectra of nuance but basically that was the gist.

People defending a traditional stance based on the same ancient text as used to justify things they wouldn't even fantasise about doing (hopefully).

This is why my attack was on the text. It's the source, it advocates activity repellent to almost every human being and yet it is defended and wheeled out by otherwise gentle souls like Ric2. Or people who agree they don't literally believe or endorse it like Warb.

When he endorsed the film of a young woman quoting Leviticus I never imagined him wanting to kill me but I did need to highlight the underlining dissonance.