Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Take your civility and shove it, Joanne.


Awwww ... poor babies. Apparently, some of the more sensitive wingnuts are purely having a case of the vapours, what with all the intemperate language and everything.

Get freakin' real.

Joanne seems to think she's taking the moral high ground here:

I encourage debate and respectful criticism.

With all due respect, Joanne, fuck you. There's nothing respectful about posting obvious crap from a known anti-gay site and, when you're called on it, you simply delete the post. At the very least, "respect" suggests that, when you're caught peddling ignorant horseshit, you have the spine and the class and the common courtesy to 'fess up and admit it. When bloggers and commenters tear your post to shreds, "respect" demands that you accept it and you do the apprporiate mea culpa, as opposed to indulging in childish whining and putting the blame on everyone else.

Quoth Joanne:

If there's one thing I've learned from blogging, it's that when you stoop to the level of name-calling, you lose your credibility.

Um ... how to break this to you, Joanne: you have no credibility. None. Zip. Zero. You are a coward who posts homophobic rubbish who doesn't have the sense of decency to defend it. Don't talk to me or anyone else about credibility, you worthless putz.

And in closing, once upon a time, I suggested that it might be interesting and enlightening to instigate some civil conversations with the ideological Right. If we could at least discuss the same issues reasonably and calmly, well, who knows? Maybe we could actually have all learned something. Well, fuck that. If Joanne is an example of the sort of crap we can expect from the Blogging Tories, what's the point?

And regarding the name-calling, well, here's a thought, Joanne: If you don't want to be described as an ignorant, hateful, dishonest, homophobic cunt, try not acting like one. It's just a thought, you know.

20 comments:

thwap said...

"If there's one thing I've learned from blogging, it's that when you stoop to the level of name-calling, you lose your credibility."

What about blathering on about stuff you know nothing about?

Red Tory said...

It’s funny how delicate their precious sensibilities are sometimes, isn’t it? I guess such things as racism and homophobic bigotry can all be lustily approved of and cheered on just as long as it’s couched in pleasant language. And actually, she’s even a complete hypocrite about that. She has some crack-addled maniac who regularly makes an appearance to spew her vituperative, blithering nonsense (the only good liberal is one locked up in jail and so on) and nary a word of opprobrium from Joanne is heard. In fact, she quite delights in it; provided it’s directed at those who disagree with her of course and most especially, the despicable liberals.

Anonymous said...

It's amazing how JJ likes to quote or link to discredited sources that spew garbage.
It's easy to see that it is what she believes but taken to task, she'll slither away and say that she's only putting that up for "discussion"....

mikmik said...

It is funny how (paradoxically) important protocol can be for wingnuts when it comes to spelling and grammar, or mud slinging (thus, the paradox because this is their forte) if you swear or be direct (honest) in your attacks...
But when it comes to the crucially important aspect of communication, that being logic, it assumes an almost capricious - at best - sort of importance or worth to any discussion.

Personally, facts are important to me (and most of the reality based, I mean Libs/dems/etc) and I could give a flying fuck if anyone calls me names, if they do a proper job of it!

Sort of shows everyone where your values are. I guess that type of inadvertent exposure of personal values escapes the rednecks anyways, so they don't understand. Too abstract, I think, not like spellin and gramber, or whatever!

Victoria (Lantern Bearer) said...

I have been following this thread on this site and personally "felt it to be beyond the compliment of rational opposition" (Austen-Sense and Sensibility).
However, since us C(c)onservatives place such "(paradoxical) importance" on "spelling and grammar," I would like to point out that sarcasm (your blog's tagline) is defined in the Oxford English dictinary as:
• noun the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.
Perhaps Cynic could enlighten me as to how language choises such as: "ignorant slut, worthless putz and ignorant cunt" constitute "irony".
Personnaly the only thing that I find ironic about your blog is that you and some of your readers have taken to using such hate and invective in order (presumably) to preach reason and inclusiveness.

Ti-Guy said...

Do you feel better after that pretentious, smarmy, passive-agressive (and deadly dull) comment, Victoria?

I don't want to include these reich-wingnuts in anything. They are fundamentally illiberal and are unreachable. They have to be ridiculed and exposed and very often called nasty things. They need to be marginalised by rest of us.

By the way, for someone who reads Jane Austen, your writing sucks. I'm smelling "fraud."

Adam C said...

But wait, no, no, rather than defending the malicious smears in Joanne's posts, let's start a new discussion over whether Canadian Cynic is sarcastic enough.

Actually, now that I think about it, that probably would be more interesting. At least it would be possible to reasonably argue both sides...

Rosie said...

Calling Joanne a cunt or a slut is crossing the line and in my opinion is just as bad as her homophobia. I know sarcasm is the tool you use CC, but why is it that the worst possible insult to a woman is to sexually demean her? I just thought we had moved beyond all that.

I am a regular reader of this blog and am fairly disappointed.

Paladiea said...

I have to voice my opposition over the use of the word cunt as well...

Anonymous said...

What do you expect from a single guy with three cats? What's next? "When are all those fucking c**ts going to start treating women with dignity!!??"

the rev. said...

the ignorant slut comment is a reference to the old Saturday Night Live Point/Counterpoint bit between Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtain, so lets lighten up on the accusations of wimmin-hatin' -- I don't know or care whether Joanne is promiscuious, but she is certainly ignorant. Is it okay if we call her a dick?

Rosie said...

Dick is better in my eyes:) Men were not subjugated by calling them dicks. I don't think anyone here hates women (I know it was sarcasm), but really, it is sinking to their level even if it is a joke.

Ti-Guy said...

just thought we had moved beyond all that.

Yeah, well I thought we had moved beyond public support for the persecution of people based on inalienable characteristics, but when the Reich-wingers got elected, I concluded we hadn't.

Life's full of disappointments. Naughty words like "cunt" appear the least of them, these days.

I've yet to see how being nice to these people is going to stop them.

Rosie said...

Ti-guy, why stoop to their level?

Rosie said...

oh, and while we are on the subject of cunts and sluts....here's a doozy comment from Unrepentent Old Hippie:

http://www.haloscan.com/comments/unrepentantoldhippie/3320448646978657480/#39316

If the link doesn't work, here is what was said :

"That's OK, little weenie. The Christians will still allow all you lefties to fuck your dogs and to pursue your other vile passions just as long as you keep it to your own swine selves. The muslims, on the other hand, flatly state that they will impose their "religion" on all infidels or you die.

But that's ok. You castrated hippies will never know when the scimitar separates your head from your decaying drug addled bodies. You'll be too busy licking cum off your lips or picking fetal tissue from your teeth or whatever freaks like you do with your useless lives.

What a waste of oxygen you whores are -i hope you have consistently practiced the main tenet of your religion - abort abort abort - the genetic slime that falls out of a liberal cunt is poisoning the world.

** For the purpose of clarity, this comment has been calibrated to the match the sensibilities of it's recipients.**"

A good whore to go with your cunts and sluts. Wonder if Joanne is still blaming the left?

Ti-Guy said...

Ti-guy, why stoop to their level?

Because I'm not a moral hypocrite. I don't consider myself above these people in any respect except for a commitment to truth.

Look...nothing works with these people; they repeat the same zombie lies over and over again. You can choose to engage the same boring discussions with them if you want...that's your choice and I don't fault you for it.

But others are free to make other choices. That's what freedom of expression is all about.

By the way, Rosie (and Paladiea)...did either one of you engage Joanne when she posted that dishonest tripe that started off this stupid discussion, or did it only become interesting when your identity politics alarm bells went off? If the latter....thanks for nothing.

Rosie said...

I don't normally comment on Joanne's blog. I normally don't even read her blog. I did today to point out some "inconsistencies" that her commenters weren't noticing in their arguments. In fact, I don't even comment often on this blog, I prefer just to read it.

Identity politics? Give me a break. Those words offended me and I voiced my opinion. I don't expect an apology, or a retraction. That wasn't the point. I accept that I will be offended from time to time.

Ti-Guy said...

Fair enough, Rosie.

Candace said...

Ti-Guy, you and I have disagreed far more often than we've agreed. Actually, now that I think about it, it's possible that we've never agreed (I could be wrong on that).

I'm an occasional reader of CC and a more regular, but not daily, reader of JJ, and have followed the various posts from JJ to RT to CC.

I have to agree with Paladiea & Rosie re the use of, at the very least, the "c-word" (I really HATE that word). Slut is also inappropriate as her behaviour wasn't sluttish unless you are using the original definition from a few centuries ago that implied laziness (in that she was intellectually lazy in her arguments).

Regardless, there are a variety of non-vulgar terms that would have expressed the same sentiment without triggering misogynist bells in readers of the female gender.

JJ's original post discussed society paying for personal sexual decisions but focused on homosexuality, and as such deserved some disagreement. Being late to the party, I have only read the cached post sans comments, so am not fully up to speed. That being said, I don't agree that the disagreement required vulgarity to make a point.

And having been trashed by both the left and the right, I will concede that this is not an issue solely with those on the left side of the political scale.

For the record, both CC and Ti-Guy, I know of few women who do not have a visceral, negative response to the c-word. It's just ugly. If you must hurl invectives, pick a different word.

Ti-Guy said...

Oh, go away, Candace. I'm not interested in visiting "Planet X" (Ecstasy?) anymore.

Go write for KKKate again.