PMSElle why are you talking such unadulterated ideologically driven bullshit?

[Al Swearegen]

I've picked examples showing the magnitude of the problem. The plain fact is that unless something is done, people will continue to die. Why is that so hard to understand? Why is it that so many people will deflect and compare guns to vehicles or refer to dated legislation when they should be outraged?

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

So much stupid to unpackage:

How do you know what every White Male American Evangelical Christian thinks?

You say that hate women and love fetuses and are racist and so on....can you show how you have come to this OR are you just doing a stream of consciousness and we are seeing your unfiltered prejudices and bigotry?

If it were simply the case that white male Christian Evangelicals are the problem, then being that they represent only about 9% of the country how would this be a problem?

How is being Godly, a constitutionalist, and patriotic a feature of masculinity AND how does this make someone hate women and be racist?

Being that I simply questioned the claim that it was simple to remove guns from Americans (which NOBODY honestly thinks is true) why does this mean that I am suddenly beholden to the clusterfuck of ideals you (unsupported) purport white male evangelical Christians to have?

Can you evidence ANY of this or are you talking unfiltered bullshit of monumental levels and exposing your misandrist and bigoted to views to us all?

Do you believe that reactionary Progressive virtue signallers like yourself who imply that if everyone is not on the same page as you on your "Progressive" arguments that they are bigots or unfeeling and that must virtue signal their "outrage" in the appropriate way and on demand, are the way to get any compromise on gun control in the US or are you stupid enough to think that enough pressure and outrage and calling people names will make everyone give up their guns?

Do you think that a more rational approach is to understand and appreciate that Conservatives want NO more changes or amendments and the Progressives want ALL guns taken away? That between these two positions there is a compromise to be found and it does not require calling everyone who disagrees a bigot or a heartless person who doesn't care about people getting killed (and in fact THAT is precisely why Conservatives reject coming to the table to work through these issues)?

Why are you being a dickhead?

[El]

Why are you being a dickhead?

Back atcha, Al.

I'm fine with engaging in a conversation on this stuff with someone who has demonstrated any interest in actually *having* a conversation. 

At some point, you, Al, devolved into this guy who, if he feels a member has slighted him, just follows that member around on the message board and throws walls of text at them basically demanding that they heal his butthurt by conceding that he's this amazing infallible guy who's always right about everything and has no flaws whatsoever.

I charge by the hour to talk to people with that kind of problem.

[Al Swearegen]

Why are you being a dickhead?

Back atcha, Al.

I'm fine with engaging in a conversation on this stuff with someone who has demonstrated any interest in actually *having* a conversation. 

At some point, you, Al, devolved into this guy who, if he feels a member has slighted him, just follows that member around on the message board and throws walls of text at them basically demanding that they heal his butthurt by conceding that he's this amazing infallible guy who's always right about everything and has no flaws whatsoever.

I charge by the hour to talk to people with that kind of problem.

You are not the first to make that claim. I have never claimed to be infallible and have on many occasions apologies for making mistakes. In fact, have on the forum within the last couple of weeks. Something I do not think you could be shown to do on this forum in the same period.

Unlike you I back my shit up

I was joking. Hence the smiley.

My apologies. Sympathy karma incoming

So now YOUR turn to show me any time in the last 2 weeks that YOU have made an apology on this forum. You can't, can you? You mean you castigate MY supposed belief in my presumed infallibility and yet I can evidence my acknowledgement of having been wrong and fallible and you cannot?  You speak of me and my supposed infallibility and yet you were wrong. Really wrong. Like this clusterfuck of ideals was wrong.

Jesus, are you EQUALLY as wrong with these people that you charge by the hour for? What the Hell happens to them when you get it wrong? Is there someone else there to pick up the pieces when you misdiagnose? When you misread the situation, do you put them in harm's way?

Elle, probably not best to play the doctor-patient preaching to me, this is a forum and you are my equal as I am yours. You do not know me enough to internet diagnose and I would not have thought you so fucking stupid as to go down that road.

So back to the call out, Elle.

[El]

Get over yourself PMSElle. A BETTER explanation is that Ozy does what Ozy does which is rarely retaliate and when he does it is usually a short reply that amoung other things tells you that he is not going to engage further and to "carry on Children" and the like. THAT is Ozy. It has been Ozy for the last hundred years give or take.

Now that does NOT mean in ANY version of reality that he is simply not engaging because he has not right to his opinion or reasoning behind them and only an idiot would suggest or infer it.

I know someone else who is rather good at posting one sentence snark or ..... even short video responses that she does not back up further. Do you know who that someone is? PMSElle. I have one ready to show. You posting the video clip titled "Obtuse" at me and then volunteering no more when questioned.

[Al Swearegen]

Is this the point you are deflecting to irrelevancies because you are unable to actually back yourself?

Hey, why not come onto Intensitysquared and spout Progressive Propaganda? When anyone calls you on it you can pretend you are a therapist and able to read a situation. When you are exposed as not being able to do this (which I guess is kind of crucial to what you do day to day) then allow your brain to meltdown to the point where you are posting meme videos and posting random post in big font.

I can only imagine a mentally ill person would be looking for the nearest window to leap out of, rather than to have someone talking such crap and unable to reason through what she has said.

"S...sometimes, I just feel a great emptiness and no one cares.."
"They likely don't because you are a White Evangelical Christian Male and you hate women and brown or black skinned people, you arsehole"
"I ....I ....I like women and people of other races....what do you even mean???"
"You are so very obtuse. Why don't you leave Britney alone? LOL. Cool meme, huh? Why are you even here? Don't you and your white privilege have somewhere else to be, shitlord?"

[Al Swearegen]

1. How do you know what every White Male American Evangelical Christian thinks?

2. You say that hate women and love fetuses and are racist and so on....can you show how you have come to this OR are you just doing a stream of consciousness and we are seeing your unfiltered prejudices and bigotry?

3. If it were simply the case that white male Christian Evangelicals are the problem, then being that they represent only about 9% of the country how would this be a problem?

4. How is being Godly, a constitutionalist, and patriotic a feature of masculinity AND how does this make someone hate women and be racist?

5. Being that I simply questioned the claim that it was simple to remove guns from Americans (which NOBODY honestly thinks is true) why does this mean that I am suddenly beholden to the clusterfuck of ideals you (unsupported) purport white male evangelical Christians to have?

6. Can you evidence ANY of this or are you talking unfiltered bullshit of monumental levels and exposing your misandrist and bigoted to views to us all?

7. Do you believe that reactionary Progressive virtue signallers like yourself who imply that if everyone is not on the same page as you on your "Progressive" arguments that they are bigots or unfeeling and that must virtue signal their "outrage" in the appropriate way and on demand, are the way to get any compromise on gun control in the US or are you stupid enough to think that enough pressure and outrage and calling people names will make everyone give up their guns?

8. Do you think that a more rational approach is to understand and appreciate that Conservatives want NO more changes or amendments and the Progressives want ALL guns taken away? That between these two positions there is a compromise to be found and it does not require calling everyone who disagrees a bigot or a heartless person who doesn't care about people getting killed (and in fact THAT is precisely why Conservatives reject coming to the table to work through these issues)?

9. Why are you being a dickhead?

[El]

You're very bound and determined that I play by *your* rules.

You have very specific ideas about how you want others to engage with you.  You can't cope with being slighted.  If you feel you have been, or if someone does something that hits a nerve, you begin nitpicking and browbeating for pages and pages and pages.

It seems that the options that you feel you reduce others to are to engage on your terms, in what will likely be an endless debate that gets derailed into you posting endlessly about whatever details you decide to harp on, with no actual interest in having anything productive come of it.

What actually ends up happening is it becomes clear that you're just fixated and pissed off and wanting to verbally club the person who made you feel bad into submission so you can feel better.

Once upon a time, you did make sense when you got into debates.  Once upon a time it would have been worth it to me to have this debate.

That was years ago.  In the time since, as far as I'm concerned, you've effectively blabberized yourself.

 

[Al Swearegen]

You're very bound and determined that I play by *your* rules.

You have very specific ideas about how you want others to engage with you.  You can't cope with being slighted.  If you feel you have been, or if someone does something that hits a nerve, you begin nitpicking and browbeating for pages and pages and pages.

It seems that the options that you feel you reduce others to are to engage on your terms, in what will likely be an endless debate that gets derailed into you posting endlessly about whatever details you decide to harp on, with no actual interest in having anything productive come of it.

What actually ends up happening is it becomes clear that you're just fixated and pissed off and wanting to verbally club the person who made you feel bad into submission so you can feel better.

Once upon a time, you did make sense when you got into debates.  Once upon a time it would have been worth it to me to have this debate.

That was years ago.  In the time since, as far as I'm concerned, you've effectively blabberized yourself.

 

All very interesting Elle but you made some big claims and big claims would normally require some evidence to back them. Facts do not care about your feelings. I have already demonstrated that what you have said thus far is bullshit.

I do not believe for a moment that you have the means to back yourself. You don't. You are unable to. Defending the indefensible is an attempt in futility and you use the excuse that I prevent you from being able to. I don't. This is not "my" rules but rather what you sign onto every day signing on here. That mission statement you skip over.

Considering the spam nature of some of the posts on here, the irrelevancies top what was called out and the inability to do more that moralise and bullshit without addressing anything put to you, I would say the one blabberising themselves is you. 

[Al Swearegen]

Just to reiterate what is being called out


PMSElle why are you talking such unadulterated ideologically driven bullshit?

1. How do you know what every White Male American Evangelical Christian thinks?

2. You say that hate women and love fetuses and are racist and so on....can you show how you have come to this OR are you just doing a stream of consciousness and we are seeing your unfiltered prejudices and bigotry?

3. If it were simply the case that white male Christian Evangelicals are the problem, then being that they represent only about 9% of the country how would this be a problem?

4. How is being Godly, a constitutionalist, and patriotic a feature of masculinity AND how does this make someone hate women and be racist?

5. Being that I simply questioned the claim that it was simple to remove guns from Americans (which NOBODY honestly thinks is true) why does this mean that I am suddenly beholden to the clusterfuck of ideals you (unsupported) purport white male evangelical Christians to have?

6. Can you evidence ANY of this or are you talking unfiltered bullshit of monumental levels and exposing your misandrist and bigoted to views to us all?

7. Do you believe that reactionary Progressive virtue signallers like yourself who imply that if everyone is not on the same page as you on your "Progressive" arguments that they are bigots or unfeeling and that must virtue signal their "outrage" in the appropriate way and on demand, are the way to get any compromise on gun control in the US or are you stupid enough to think that enough pressure and outrage and calling people names will make everyone give up their guns?

8. Do you think that a more rational approach is to understand and appreciate that Conservatives want NO more changes or amendments and the Progressives want ALL guns taken away? That between these two positions there is a compromise to be found and it does not require calling everyone who disagrees a bigot or a heartless person who doesn't care about people getting killed (and in fact THAT is precisely why Conservatives reject coming to the table to work through these issues)?

9. Why are you being a dickhead?

This, of course, says NOTHING about me or my intentions or my personality or any shortcoming of mine.

I may be:

Vindictive and petty;
A bloviating blowhard;
an egomaniacal narcissist;
A sociopathic bully;
A poopy-pants
Or some measure of all of these and more

My reasons for doing anything may be good, bad or indifferent.

None of that addresses the callout or has anything to say about it. Not only is a lot of that irrelevant but as pointed out you have been talking crap there too that you are unable to back.

I am happy to admit to being a bad, annoying person. Now can you back yourself in this callout or were you talking complete dishonest crap that you cannot back because it is and always was complete ideologically driven bullshit?

[Al Swearegen]

Elle's last post is spot on. Al lost this one.

She hasn't even addressed this one, and basically has only said she's not going to. She simply doesn't want to discuss it with Sir Les in particular. If that's the case, then she shouldn't have dragged his name into it. Am still holding out hope Elle might wish to discuss the topic of toxic masculinity with Jack.

Arguing with Al is like arguing with a fanatic these days. It's never going to be what you think it is.

Just to reiterate what is being called out


PMSElle why are you talking such unadulterated ideologically driven bullshit?

1. How do you know what every White Male American Evangelical Christian thinks?

2. You say that hate women and love fetuses and are racist and so on....can you show how you have come to this OR are you just doing a stream of consciousness and we are seeing your unfiltered prejudices and bigotry?

3. If it were simply the case that white male Christian Evangelicals are the problem, then being that they represent only about 9% of the country how would this be a problem?

4. How is being Godly, a constitutionalist, and patriotic a feature of masculinity AND how does this make someone hate women and be racist?

5. Being that I simply questioned the claim that it was simple to remove guns from Americans (which NOBODY honestly thinks is true) why does this mean that I am suddenly beholden to the clusterfuck of ideals you (unsupported) purport white male evangelical Christians to have?

6. Can you evidence ANY of this or are you talking unfiltered bullshit of monumental levels and exposing your misandrist and bigoted to views to us all?

7. Do you believe that reactionary Progressive virtue signallers like yourself who imply that if everyone is not on the same page as you on your "Progressive" arguments that they are bigots or unfeeling and that must virtue signal their "outrage" in the appropriate way and on demand, are the way to get any compromise on gun control in the US or are you stupid enough to think that enough pressure and outrage and calling people names will make everyone give up their guns?

8. Do you think that a more rational approach is to understand and appreciate that Conservatives want NO more changes or amendments and the Progressives want ALL guns taken away? That between these two positions there is a compromise to be found and it does not require calling everyone who disagrees a bigot or a heartless person who doesn't care about people getting killed (and in fact THAT is precisely why Conservatives reject coming to the table to work through these issues)?

9. Why are you being a dickhead?

This, of course, says NOTHING about me or my intentions or my personality or any shortcoming of mine.

I may be:

Vindictive and petty;
A bloviating blowhard;
an egomaniacal narcissist;
A sociopathic bully;
A poopy-pants
Or some measure of all of these and more

My reasons for doing anything may be good, bad or indifferent.

None of that addresses the callout or has anything to say about it. Not only is a lot of that irrelevant but as pointed out you have been talking crap there too that you are unable to back.

I am happy to admit to being a bad, annoying person. Now can you back yourself in this callout or were you talking complete dishonest crap that you cannot back because it is and always was complete ideologically driven bullshit?

It is pretty clear EXACTLY what it is and has always been, hasn't it? I mean if for nothing else, the bold and numbered questions should really highlight to ANY rational and reasonable person EXACTLY what the argument is and is not.

Now it may be that answering these questions is difficult or a discussion that Elle does not wish to make or perhaps she (after having started it) wishes not to engage when pressed or any other number of things BUT it would be beyond dishonest to wave this off as being unclear. I hope this is NOT what you are attempting, Odeon. If so it is pretty transpaently untrue and everyone can see that.

[benjimanbreeg]

Are you talking about all white men Elle?

[Al Swearegen]

To those inthe Peanut Gallery that are in any way confused

Yes Elle DID say that I shared a clusterfuck of ideal with a certain subset of the American public that she named and then she shared the reasons that underpinned these ideals and why this subset collectively shared them.
It is quoted in the very first post in this callout if for any reason you are confused. It is all there and evidenced.

She also wondered why I shared this with this subset.

So she made ridiculous and unbackable claims and then on top of this pill of bullshit decided to ask why I shared all of this with that group. Also shared in the quote.

I did address this in THIS callout, first post AGAIN. So I am not sure why any of you may put it about that I am not. However, Am I better to say "Prove that I am a racist bigot, fetus loving, woman hating, gun toting, America loving and God fearing douchebag like those guys?"
THAT would kind of give her original Progressive Feminist diatribe some credibility or worth that it doesnt deserve.

No, I am not offended by her unwarranted, irrational and moronic slight against me, but I sure as Hell will expose her stupidity and her inability to back herself AND highlighr her own bigotry.

It should be apparent to all but the very stupid that there is no way in Hell Elle can back herself. It was simply a bigoted rant bereft of any fact or any logic.

Her defence was not to any point of the call out but rather her trying to imply psychological shortcomings of mine (diagnosing anyone on the internet or over the phone I think is bad form for someone in her profession, if not blatantly against the rules that regulate her - no matter) but no matter how clever (or amusing) you all found this she didn't address a damn thing.She couldn't.

Now aftrr another weird spammy post, she is down to saying I am a poopypants (Odeon thought THAT) was a winner). She still has not backed herself.

There was a lot of stupid in her progressive feminist rant because progressive feminism is stupid and illogical and unable to be backed by those that spew it.

Elle is one of its cult members and stupid for doing so or for showing her ridiculousness with her rant and for making the effort to star me in her moronic premise.

Make no mistake this has Nothing to do with me. If she had said the same of any of you as what she said of me, each point would still be as equally indefensible and as ideological,  nonsensical bullshit as what it was with me, so her saying she won't respond because of who or what she thinks I am, is not something I will entertain for her and has nothing to do with anything. Ot would be equally as indefeasible regardless of who she aimed it at.

[Al Swearegen]

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

Being that I simply questioned the claim that it was simple to remove guns from Americans (which NOBODY honestly thinks is true) why does this mean that I am suddenly beholden to the clusterfuck of ideals you (unsupported) purport white male evangelical Christians to have?

Can you evidence ANY of this or are you talking unfiltered bullshit of monumental levels and exposing your misandrist and bigoted to views to us all?

As this was in the very first post in this callout, against Elle, HERE, I cannot seriously take the claim that I have not somehow addressed to Elle that she made unsupportable accusations about me supposedly having the presumed ideals she has strawmanned (or should that be "strawpersoned") White Evangelical Christian Males.

It would simply be untrue.

The fact that I dedicated what I had and merely postscripted that she was being a dickhead, you lend more weight against:

Why are you being a dickhead?

than

Being that I simply questioned the claim that it was simple to remove guns from Americans (which NOBODY honestly thinks is true) why does this mean that I am suddenly beholden to the clusterfuck of ideals you (unsupported) purport white male evangelical Christians to have?

Can you evidence ANY of this or are you talking unfiltered bullshit of monumental levels and exposing your misandrist and bigoted to views to us all?

Seems slightly selective, maybe.

As to any credibility given to Elle for making "stereotypes", no she made bigoted generalisations. No, they are not the same thing. Yes, stereotypes are generalisations and many stereotypes have reason to exist.

But I think you are giving Elle WAY too much credit. Why? Because there IS a stereotype of the Gun toting, God-fearing Patriot. As American as apple pie. Stereotype. To be honest I see nothing wrong with her saying I am like this. Why?

Well because I am an Atheist. I am not American or even pro-American. I am indifferent to guns and they have zero impact on my country. Most of my extended family have guns. Some kids in my daughter's college have guns. Most people don't. It is not a big thing. Indifference.

So who cares about that? The stereotype is neither here nor there nor is any attempt to pretend I was now somehow a believer of God and loved guns and was enamoured with America. It is redundant.

So far all good.

Then now that she had stated these people were all the gun-toting block that ultimately informs the gun culture and somehow impossible to shift or whatever (despite representing only about 9% of the American population).  she then says that these people hate brown or black skinned people and hate women.

That is not a stereotype that is a baseless generalisation. Christian male evangelicals as a people, hate women and are racists? That needs something behind it. Some evidence to lend it some credence. Even to see them over-represented in the women-hating and racist populations.

Then she said that I am infected with the same clusterfuck. Which one? Is there ANYTHING she can support in any of this? IF she can (and I am sure she cannot) support any of that crap, then the next step is to show how what she supported as it applies to them ......applies to me.

I think we all know that she can't do any of that and it has NOTHING to do with credible stereotypes and nothing to do with later arguments (look at the times) about "toxic masculinity" which were not as ridiculous but still more Feminist twaddle

Some of it's that it's been culturally packaged into the same clusterfuck of ideals as white american evangelical christianity and masculinity- the idea that real men love god, their country, and their guns.  (Also, they kind of hate women, kind of love fetuses, healthcare is something only dirty commies want to have be affordable, and foreigners and non-foreign brown and black people are ruining everything, as is every poor person they don't personally know.)

Don't know why the fuck sir les is infected with that that, he's halfway across the fucking planet.

By the way, if anyone with whom there seems to be a snowball's chance in hell of actually having a dialogue with wants to know how I feel about the specifics of all this, feel free to ask.  I feel right now like it'd be wasted time and effort to get into.  I'm not looking to outlaw all guns- I was fucking literally making plans to go shooting with a couple of friends a week ago as of today (and yes, I have my FID). 

However (and the following paragraphs are the very broad version), I see no goddamn reason that we shouldn't have more restrictions on gun ownership (my state had a decent set of common sense restrictions, anyway).  That wouldn't have stopped this guy, but maybe it'll stop the next one.  I also see no goddamn good reason (as stated by other people here) for people to have access to the level of sophistication and deadliness in weaponry that gun nuts (not sane gun owners, but the actual nuts) seem to want.  Before the shooting, we were going to consider making silencers legal, ffs.  Why the actual fuck do we need those, exactly?  And silencers WOULD have made this last shooting a hell of a lot worse.

I absolutely think toxic masculinity plays a role in a lot of these shootings, and I woudln't be surprised if it played a role in that one.  Don't believe me, look at the fucking gender breakdown of who commits mass shootings.  Something's up there- and I do think part of it is also part of the cancer that's fucking my country all up for everyone who isn't a rich white man.

I also think the NRA flooding politics and culture with dirty money plays a huge role.  Libertarians like to say follow the money (and I think that's valid and wise in general).  The NRA fucking profits off of these mass shootings, because the debate about gun laws comes up, people panic, and stockpile more guns.  They have too many politicians in their pockets, and they literally profit from murder.  I defy anyone to come up with a reason that THAT isn't a problem.

Elle has opted out and not supported herself and it is not because of me but because she is unable to back herself. What she said was just her spewing Progressive talking points. All the checkboxes on her Progressive Stack argument model were checked. It was not meant to make sense but rather to signal her outrage and disgust at the right people. "Gotta hate those filthy Christians and those oppressive white males". It was never meant to be questioned. When pressed she could not defend the argument and so she tried having a go at me and failed, then she flounced off.

Some would call that a win. I would call that ridiculous.

[Jack]

I cannot seriously take the claim that I have not somehow addressed to Elle that she made unsupportable accusations about me

Yes, I see you did in fact do that. Though the overall focus didn't appear to be about you, and didn't understand why it wasn't. My saying the callout should be about you brought the response that I should make no mistake and it has nothing to do with you, so now don't know what to say about that point.

As to any credibility given to Elle for making "stereotypes", no she made bigoted generalisations. No, they are not the same thing. Yes, stereotypes are generalisations and many stereotypes have reason to exist.

Many stereotypes are also very negative. Not all, but still. It's not that stereotypes have a reason as in a purpose, but rather there is a reason they come to be.

But I think you are giving Elle WAY too much credit.

Not really giving her any credit at all. Stereotyping is lazy and only fit for petty arguments, not thoughtful discussions. Didn't respond directly to it but don't get me wrong, it was triggering for me too. That's why trying to engage her in the discussion.

[redface]

You're wasting your time with this lass, bruv.