elef Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Hi, P127 is correct - no politics. elef Temp Mod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 flyonzewall said:BWAHAHAHA!!! anyhow, i don't have the time to debate with you now, going for a holiday in a few hours. It doesn't matter, holiday or not, you wouldn't have actually _debated_ anything anyway... "like the last time"... flyonzewall said:i can only guess that you gonna post yourself into the shit again, like last time. I don't know what do you exactly mean by "post yourself into the shit", I guess, if really it's anything like last time, it means me asking you questions and making points and you insulting and "bwahahaing" me... "BWAHAHAHA!!!" is the only kind of answer you are able to give, fly. Enjoy, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 jasmine said:Just wait a minute, the "cowboy" is just a figure of speech!! However, ones have a right to interpret as ones like, Don't worry, everybody here perfectly understood your "figure of speech"... jasmine said:I give up (How quick!) Give up what exactly? Putting aside that remark of yours that got me started, could you reply to the _actual_points_ of my reply (and not *only* to the _reason_ for which I replied) or you, like fly, have remained speechless and without any counter-argument? Ciao, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grabii Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Fig, Perhaps everybody understood jasmine's figure-of-speech, but I for one did not understand it the way you did. jasmine did not reference or imply "a certain "cowboy"", she referenced the concept of the 'cowboy' mentality. Regards, JEff pao said: jasmine said:Just wait a minute, the "cowboy" is just a figure of speech!! However, ones have a right to interpret as ones like, Don't worry, everybody here perfectly understood your "figure of speech"... Ciao, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 pattaya127 said:Guys, whoever started it, no politics, please! No problem, the one who started it (who is very easy to spot and who is not the one to whom you have addressed your reply...) and the other one who supported the first one are not going to reply to me (1 is speechless and on "holiday" and 1 is just speechless) so we three are not going to do any more damage Ciao, FIGJAM. P.S. Can I answer to that poster asking me what cultures am I talking about or that too is deemed "politics"? We are just talking of the culture and traditions of some hundred millions of people here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattaya127 Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Basically, at this point, you should indeed "answer to that poster" with a PM. There is nothing too wrong about a political statement or view, what we cut short is political argumentation, which usuallly comes soon after the initial statement. Hence our watchful eye..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 jeffreyh said:Fig, Perhaps everybody understood jasmine's figure-of-speech, but I for one did not understand it the way you did. jasmine did not reference or imply "a certain "cowboy"", she referenced the concept of the 'cowboy' mentality. PM or e-mail me if you want to discuss the matter, as although we are not talking explicitly we may be breaking the rules here. Anyway... cowboys have never been a common figure of speech to indicate people who "start conflicts in the world". That is, until this term has recently started to be used referring to a "certain cowboy" who is believed (using the same words Jasmine used talking about "her cowboy") to "push the so-called universal standards too far hence starting conflicts in the modern world", to "not respect other beliefs and cultures" and to "not try to understand other people better and convince them" instead of starting wars around the world... Ciao, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 pattaya127 said:Basically, at this point, you should indeed "answer to that poster" with a PM. There is nothing too wrong about a political statement or view, what we cut short is political argumentation, which usuallly comes soon after the initial statement. Hence our watchful eye..... Besides the cowboy thing which is undubitably politics (although not explicit), I'm not too sure where exactly is the politics in talking about, for example, well known Indian custom of burning alive the widows on the pyre of their just dead husbands or some Muslim-African peoples' tradition to cut the clitoris or sew the vagina of the children os some Arab peoples' custom to kill or disfigure a raped woman... Anyway, I bend to the rules of the board... FIGJAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Redbaron said: to condemn the fact that and in some culture and custom beating a woman is not that biggie ummm... who's cultures endorse these procedures? I just noticed that went unanswered so, since I don't think this has anything to do with politics... In Saudi Arabia, for example, the women didn't even have the right to have ID cards until just a couple of years ago(!)... In Thailand, to give you another -much lighter- example, beating one's wife, girlfriend, daughter is nothing to be _particularly_ ashamed of... No Thai man is going to strongly blame or criticize another Thai man for having beaten "his own woman". We are taught to think of the man who raises his hand on a woman as a vile, that's simply not the case in LOS. Would you ever laugh with your friends at how you beated the shit out of your girlfriend? Ciao, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 There ain't no such things as "Universal Human Rights". It's just political corrected bullshit. Please explain! Actually if you take one person of the lowest status of every culture they could easily compromise on "universal" standards. But of course, if you take one political or religious leader of every culture then they will never compromise on universal standards... Best regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.