I'm not moving it and I deleted the content at OP's request.

If people want to rehash the material they can write it for the 1037th time in their own thread.

Edit: And it would be great if people would follow OPs rules so I don't have to keep editing posts.

This is, of course, the nub of the gib.

What Nichlemn is talking about is somehow trying to handicap what some Politard 'is' in his secret inner heart.

This is conflating intolerant personal animus -vs- systemic institutionalized discrimination... which ignores, trivializes, and enables denying the institutionalized nature of the problem.

What MrWookie is talking about is identifying intolerant content in posts. He isn't speculating about what some Politard 'is' (or is not) in his secret inner heart... he's making an observation about what that Politard 'does'.

Man this OP owning threads stuff is dumb. Y U CHAIN UNCHAINED

But politards don't do, they say. And what is said, if xist, is far more often covert.

To claim infallibility in IDing xism (especially without EVER seeking clarification) of people writing **** on message boards is hubris, pure and simple.

That makes literally no sense.

Yes, of course. Interwebs forums != real world. We are only what we do, and all we can do is post.

Once again, this is all tied up with intent... in other words, tied up with the secret inner heart.

For example, let's say PolitardOne says "Yay Voter ID Laws !!!1!". I can at that point say "that's sexist." I don't need to handicap PolitardOne's secret inner heart and speculate about what 'covert'-ness, etc., he might harbor there.

Infallibility in that regard is an irrational and delusional claim. I'm a little shocked it was admitted so openly, but not very surprised members of Mr.Wookie's tribe are all eager to agree and claim some of that perfection for themselves.

No wonder personal attacks and insults are inconsistently modded in the chained forum, Mr.Wookie probably thinks he doing it perfectly and is blinded by his own hubris.

If only there were a politics forum where Wookie wasn't a moderator. If only.

Thank goodness for that. Though, still doesn't address related issues best left for a different thread than this one.

This isn't what most people mean (or how they expect to be interpreted). If someone says "You are a sexist", it's not shorthand for "You might just be a swell guy who harbors no conscious ill-will towards women and has great relationships with the women in his life, but happens to deny the extent of systematic institutionalised discrimination against women". Apologists like you might try to make it out as that, but both sides know that they're really saying something like "From the few words I've read from you I can tell that you are personally a hateful POS". If you were really trying to get the first meaning across, you could make it much more obvious.

Do you have any research to back up this opinion? Are you confusing an IRL context with an interwebs forum context?

Don't confuse an IRL context with an interwebs forum context. I'm sure the above is indeed what people almost always mean here in Los Dos Politards.

And I'm sure almost nobody means this in Los Dos Politards.

Yeah, we keep hearing this. However I've never seen it work... not once.

Anyone who starts whining about 'shouting and screaming' or 'name calling' is interested only in shutting down the conversation. So far, AFAIK, it has never mattered if the topic was broached with "You're sexist", "That's sexist", or "You might just... against woman". At best we get whining about "sexism being brought into everything", the PC-police, or Femnazi-hustlers.

LMFAO... WTF am I an apologist for? And what might these two 'sides' be?

If that thread doesn't exist, someone could start it. Or do you think it is impossible to create?

Nich- Hey wow once again you put all the burden on OTHER PEOPLE to make ABUNDANTLY CLEAR that their responses to offensive garbage aren't intended to suggest anything about the character of the person who wrote the offensive garbage.

The idea that maybe people with such delicate temperaments could maybe write slightly less offensive garbage, of course, does not come up. Don't be absurd!

Because obviously people NEED to express their views about how rape claims are often false or whatever, they aren't CHOOSING to believe that. Those are sincere views and presumed valid and also given the benefit of the doubt for no ****ing reason.

It's the MEANIES, those people who "graduated high school" or "read a book" or "interact with human beings outside this forum in any capacity", it's the MEANIES who need to be very circumspect with their writing, because THEIR responses to seeing offensive writing aren't valid.

Oh it is totally possible, just not practical at the moment. I'd rather craft lengthy OPs that involve linked and quoted content from my PC rather than my phone. Maybe tomorrow if time permits.

And in reading such words, it's generally easy to come up with a dozen possible meanings behind what was said. Hence, the need for soul reading.

Oh I'm sorry, perhaps I should add "oh yeah, don't be bigoted either". Maybe this is a type of guideline we should all adhere to, let's say by not allowing people to criticise the behaviour of cops until they've made it abundantly clear that they are do not in fact endorse criminals. And if turned out they were in fact secretly pro-criminal, that would automatically refute anything they said about police.

And if you actually learned to read the context of my post, you'd see that it wasn't about criticising posts that claimed to "read" people so much as it is critical of excessive confidence in that ability. Not having 100% confidence in the ability to read someone = PRO-BIGOTRY!

We can't all be blessed with the ability to flawlessly ID dick sucking autists and pussy ass b****es. Many are called, few are chosen.

The only one who talked about 'soul reading' ITT is you.

The only one who talked about 'soul reading' ITT is you.

Dude, stop not listening.

This whole fixation about 'soul reading' people's 'secret inner heart' is what is pro-intolerant. It's not about what someone is, it's about what someone does.

Again: conflating intolerant personal animus with systemic institutionalized discrimination ignores, trivializes, and enables denial of such systemic intolerance.

I didn't even know it was possible for greens to mod oranges

Dude isn't even green!

Non-Green mods all ruining threads because people can't take the natural evolution of conversations. MONSTERS ALL OF YOU.

He can edit any posts in this forum, but he can't ban me.

Don't criticize Mr.Wookies self-proclaimed infallible judgement or you enable THE SYSTEM.( and take away the fun of exploiting something serious as an excuse to abuse other users in the forum)

Shame Trolly- #1 apologist for divide and abuse- a method of oppression used by THE SYSTEM.