EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

Personal insults
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1632
Page 7 of 7

Author:  Sandra John [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

Red wrote:
Sandra John wrote:
Let me see now. Publicly ridiculing Phantomuk's dyslexia is supposed to help him appreciate the, "irony of his situation". Yes? :? No, sorry! Can't grasp it. Would you care to elaborate?


Perhaps ********* should have been upfront about his 'condition' a little sooner. :) After all, the first mention is in the thread in question, and he himself treated it as a joke. :P I guess that would make him the 'originator' that owes everyone an apology? :D


Perhaps you should have been here a little sooner. Phantomuk's dyslexia has been common knowledge on this Board for quite some time. He is allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: make light of it. You are not allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: ridicule him.

Quote:
Or maybe you're being played by both sides, and that's the real humor of the situation? :wink:


Or maybe I'm playing both sides. :roll: Or maybe no-one's playing anyone at all and everybody's deadly serious. "Maybe", is such a useful word - isn't it?

Author:  Red [ Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:07 am ]
Post subject: 

Oh, Dear. Such bad timing. Rather a moot point now, isn't it?

Author:  Sandra John [ Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:45 am ]
Post subject: 

Red wrote:
Oh, Dear. Such bad timing. Rather a moot point now, isn't it?


No. It is now an academic point. Timing is clearly lousy. Argument is, if anything, validated.

Author:  Fosgate [ Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:28 am ]
Post subject: 

Sandra John wrote:
Perhaps you should have been here a little sooner. Phantomuk's dyslexia has been common knowledge on this Board for quite some time. He is allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: make light of it. You are not allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: ridicule him.


As humorous as it may be, it shows poor taste <i>regardless</i> of who's making the joke. Can you say "double standard"? Yes, I thought so.

Author:  Archer [ Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

Fosgate wrote:
Sandra John wrote:
Perhaps you should have been here a little sooner. Phantomuk's dyslexia has been common knowledge on this Board for quite some time. He is allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: make light of it. You are not allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: ridicule him.


As humorous as it may be, it shows poor taste <i>regardless</i> of who's making the joke. Can you say "double standard"? Yes, I thought so.
Yeah, if he can, why can't we?

Author:  Sandra John [ Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:30 pm ]
Post subject: 

Archer wrote:
Fosgate wrote:
Sandra John wrote:
Perhaps you should have been here a little sooner. Phantomuk's dyslexia has been common knowledge on this Board for quite some time. He is allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: make light of it. You are not allowed to, "treat it as a joke", viz: ridicule him.


As humorous as it may be, it shows poor taste <i>regardless</i> of who's making the joke. Can you say "double standard"? Yes, I thought so.


No you can't Fosgate. Making light of one's own disabilities is a (well-known I'd have thought) psychological device for reducing the stress and emotional pain connected with them and deflecting negative feedback from insensitive others. Ridiculing someone else's disabilities is an entirely different matter. I'm truly amazed that that needs saying.


Quote:
Yeah, if he can, why can't we?


Please see explanation above Archer. If you still think there is no difference in the two cases go ahead and call it a double standard if you like.

Author:  Fosgate [ Fri Jan 13, 2006 12:40 am ]
Post subject: 

Fosgate wrote:
As humorous as it may be, it shows poor taste regardless of who's making the joke. Can you say "double standard"? Yes, I thought so.
Sandra John wrote:
No you can't Fosgate.
Sure I can, mainly because that's what it is. You can't admonish one side and espouse another if each do the exact same thing.

Sandra John wrote:
Making light of one's own disabilities is a (well-known I'd have thought) psychological device for reducing the stress and emotional pain connected with them and deflecting negative feedback from insensitive others.
It sets a poor example and gives rise to awkward circumstances. Cracking jokes with the intent that no one take them as such? No thank you. Playing along is much more reassuring to <i>everyone</i> than a sudden, momentary silence, staring, and throat-clearing. Personally, I'd much rather not have to deal with it in the first place, especially if I didn't know the intent of the joker.

Sandra John wrote:
Ridiculing someone else's disabilities is an entirely different matter.
There will be some that interpret jesting attitudes and comments toward disabilities as a signal that they are "fair game". Responses, even ones that go overboard, are not necessarily meant to be critical.

Page 7 of 7 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/