Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
I know, but I’ve found that on sites like these it often doesn’t make a difference
Edited
The posts your replying to are 3 or 4 years old
@Background Pony #5FA7
I don’t think you know what anti-Semite means, either that our you’re taking the standard SJW approach of accusing your opponent of being bigoted in various random ways despite no evidence of them having such bigotries
@Background Pony #60C2
It’s certainly an interesting psychological/sociological experiment, but like all experiments of its type it always ends the same way: people wondering if the mass genocide of humanity isn’t such an bad idea after all
Edited
Alright, I suppose, was mostly just saying what I said since there was talk about word definitions and someone being/not being a “bigot”, so felt the need to chime in there, since the person saying it might’ve meant it the way I mentioned.
I’m not sure that’s quite the same. As I mentioned, redefining “ignorant” to mean “rude” removes its already quite useful original meaning, attaches a negative connotation to a simple lack of information, and implies that anyone who behaves in a way that isn’t according to standard social rules is uneducated. In the context we saw just now, it’s also being abused to say that a person whose political views disagree with the common perspective must have those views because they lack knowledge.
It’s not just that the word’s definition is being lost, it’s that it’s being changed to something which encourages false assumptions and unfounded claims. Altering the word to mean what’s being suggested here would result in more cases of actual ignorance, of an entirely bad sort.
To be fair, if we’re talking definitions now, I’ve seen “bigot” used to mean “one who engages in unjustified discrimination”. Might not be the traditional meaning but I can see why one would use it that way, it’s more useful than the traditional one.
Whatever, anti-semite bigot transphobic shitlord.
I don’t need one. None of your accusations are substantiated in any way. I’m not even right wing, I’m actually slightly left leaning.
K? Is that your only reply?
You’re saying that because you don’t have one.
k
Nice try, I see you right-wing bigots talk like that all the time.
The reality is, you really do hate transgendered people. You really do hate me for having that opinion, you are intolerant.
You don’t want me to hold that opinion. You are a bigot, you’re just afraid to admit it.
I’ve never been intolerant to other people’s opinions, so no, I’m not a bigot. If you like transexuals that’s perfectly fine. That’s your view and you’re free to hold it.
There’s a society that’s morally opposed to faces?
You are such a bigot, I can’t velieve you.
I’m going to report you to the anti-facist society.
Google says so, apparently. The dictionary I’ve got in the house says otherwise, and I much prefer the word’s intended definition, as it not only relates more accurately to the word from which it was derived, but it is also less derogatory toward those who lack knowledge and does not allow one to infer that those who speak in a politically incorrect way do so because they are uninformed. If it means what you say at all, it came to do so through extreme misuse, much like the use of “trigger” to mean something that merely offends a person rather than something that provokes an involuntary response as a result of an actual mental condition.
I cannot bear the idea of watching people abuse a word’s meaning so often that it is lost entirely in a way that results in foolishness and censorship, and I would greatly appreciate it if you tried not to contribute to such an effect.
I don’t like transexuals, or whatever word people prefer for them this week. It’s just how I am. Call me what you like, ignorant or rude. I don’t really care. I say what I think and know, not what others would rather I say.
“Ignorant” can also be defined as being discourteous or rude. In my experience, people who throw around slurs like “trannies” tend to fall under that heading.
“Ignorant” is such an interesting word. It means that one lacks knowledge, but it is often used to refer to those who disagree with popular opinion, no matter what knowledge may have led them to that point of view. In a strange turn of chance, those who are too quick to use a word can find themselves demonstrating its definition.
Sigh. You were on such a roll, and then you had to go on that ignorant rant about transgender people.
Morals and overall normalcy would deteriorate to a point of non existence. Nearly all culture, religion, myth and nature would cease to exist because there are no transexual animals and almost all of our current culture, religion and myth is based in and was invented by “cisgendered” individuals. And I put that in commas because “cisgendered” is a worthless term. What these delusionals are calling “cis” is just the natural state of any living being, to be comfortable in and to embody their actual sex. Even if you don’t care about all that, consider just what the suppresion of “cisgendered” people would be. Oppression, plain and simple. Discrimination against others for their nature.
[QUACK]
Edited because: Rule #0
Transexualism being gender dysphoria and whatnot.
No cis=no life