Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bjornebye

Wokeism

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

Look at this woke cunt, virtue signalling by kicking the banana instead of picking it up or just dribbling around it. 

If he had any moxy he'd eat it like Gazza ate the Mars Bar. 

0_Football-21st-February-1988-FA-Cup-Fith-Round-Goodison-Park-Everton-0-v-Liverpool-1-Liverpools.jpg

John Barnes really was a spectacularly handsome bastard, wasn't he?

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's some areas where I roll my eyes, but that's the level of my 'outrage'. 

The 'him/his/he' thing...that's funny, but maybe to a handful of people it actually matters, so let's play this game. 

The odd thing is that it's not really applicable when you talk to the person 'himself', only when referring to them in a conversation with a third person.  

 

I'm more annoyed by other things.  Tattoos.  There's too many tattoos on people now, especially writing.  I should definitely be able to not give a job to someone on the basis of making poor decisions, repeatedly, around their tattoos.  Likewise, I should be able to hire someone based on a brilliant tattoo, that shows creativity, decisiveness, and money management.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

 

I don't think you're woke. I don't know why you would think that based on what I said. Me referring to that twats definition was more an observation on how confused these self-styled 'anti-woke' types are.

 

But I do think you're given to taking offence too easily.

 

 

Hey, I just wanted to be crystal clear. We’ve got Boss saying I’m woke, you saying I’m not, both reading the same things I write.  I don’t take offence, I’m happy to point out where something is clearly a right old load of bollocks.  Like the Trans thread, to me that’s just mental. Being asked to deny everything we know and understand to make someone feel better and denying the obvious and clear risks that will cause.  Luckily, people like the EHRC are agreeing with me.  It’s all here and I think replays the arguments I’ve been making for a couple of years.  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/30/observer-view-ehrc-decision-scotland-gender-recognition-reforms?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other 
 

It’s interesting you brought anti semitism into the conversation. You didn’t think of saying islamaphobia?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Hey, I just wanted to be crystal clear. We’ve got Boss saying I’m woke, you saying I’m not, both reading the same things I write.  I don’t take offence, I’m happy to point out where something is clearly a right old load of bollocks.  Like the Trans thread, to me that’s just mental. Being asked to deny everything we know and understand to make someone feel better and denying the obvious and clear risks that will cause.  Luckily, people like the EHRC are agreeing with me.  It’s all here and I think replays the arguments I’ve been making for a couple of years.  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/30/observer-view-ehrc-decision-scotland-gender-recognition-reforms?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other 
 

It’s interesting you brought anti semitism into the conversation. You didn’t think of saying islamaphobia?   

 

I didn't, no. 

 

For what's it's worth, my comments about you getting easily offended had little or nothing to do with your stance on trans rights. I'm aware that you don't know who I am, what with me having only been a member here for 13 years, but I've posted on that thread, mostly in support, on a few occasions.

Edited by Jack the Sipper
Added a bit more
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

I didn't, no. 

So you think people over use anti-semitism, but not islamaphobia?   Jews Don’t Count. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

Here we go!

It’s a good book, your mate James O’Brian recommends it.  One of the key themes is that when other claims of racism are made they are generally accepted, but claims of A/S are routinely denied or questioned.  There’s 2 fucking massive threads on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Model building groups on FaceAIDS are a great laugh.

 

A lot of social media sites will shut groups or delete posts that display hateful symbology. I will build a Luftwaffe aircraft from WW2 and I will put the swastika on the tail because I want it to be historically accurate because it gives me a sense of completion.

 

Now, when it comes to posting the pics of it I'll edit the pic so as not to display the swastika. This keeps FaceAIDS off my back, it's a symbol that is widely associated with the most hateful group of twats to walk this earth and keeps the group out of trouble. The amount of arsey twats who don't like this editing is unreal. Surely with having a badly scribbled disc over the tail should be an indication that it is there.

 

"It's history and it should be shown!"

 

"Can't display anything now!"

 

"Hiding it is woke and erasing history!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we all just at least agree that the term woke us fucking shite, and the smug and sneering way it is used is minging. 
 

Same with Karen, snowflake, cuck…I can’t think of the others, but they are all fucking awful and the cunts who use them and drive their significance into the language we use can fuck off. If they’re not used condescendingly, they are used antagonistically. So cunty.

 

Edit - Cancelled - that’s another one

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

One of the key themes is that when other claims of racism are made they are generally accepted, but claims of A/S are routinely denied or questioned.

 

Literally seen today on the forum.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

Literally seen today on the forum.

Misrepresenting reality yet again. I quite clearly called them ‘blatant acts of anti-semitism” however questioned the timing of how the DM reported them, not the actual events you lying prick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Misrepresenting reality yet again. I quite clearly called them ‘blatant acts of anti-semitism” however questioned the timing of how the DM reported them, not the actual events you lying prick. 

 

Thanks for proving that you did question it and that I was telling the truth.

 

I was referring to the people in the bus hurling racist abuse at Jews which happened yesterday and was reported yesterday.

 

You also referenced the Jewish men being attacked in the street, which happened on Wednesday evening and was widely reported on Thursday. Not sure what the Daily Mail has to do with it. Maybe you can explain, along with your explanation for what you meant about convenient timing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Strontium said:

 

Thanks for proving that you did question it and that I was telling the truth.

 

I was referring to the people in the bus hurling racist abuse at Jews which happened yesterday and was reported yesterday.

 

You also referenced the Jewish men being attacked in the street, which happened on Wednesday evening and was widely reported on Thursday. Not sure what the Daily Mail has to do with it. Maybe you can explain, along with your explanation for what you meant about convenient timing.

Yet again you’re fucking lying. I was questioning how it was reported. Unfortunately there are anti-Semitic, racist, sexist etc attacks all the time. The DM made this particular attack headline news, made reference to Corbyn and Labour and had a comments section full of the usual slurs against him and Labour a day after the Tory leader had to face serious questions in PMQs. 
 

I quite clearly called them “blatant anti-Semitic attacks” so stop lying all the fucking time you dog shagging grass 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Belarus said:

Can we all just at least agree that the term woke us fucking shite, and the smug and sneering way it is used is minging. 
 

Same with Karen, snowflake, cuck…I can’t think of the others, but they are all fucking awful and the cunts who use them and drive their significance into the language we use can fuck off. If they’re not used condescendingly, they are used antagonistically. So cunty.

 

Edit - Cancelled - that’s another one

Triggered.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

Thanks for proving that you did question it and that I was telling the truth.

 

I was referring to the people in the bus hurling racist abuse at Jews which happened yesterday and was reported yesterday.

 

You also referenced the Jewish men being attacked in the street, which happened on Wednesday evening and was widely reported on Thursday. Not sure what the Daily Mail has to do with it. Maybe you can explain, along with your explanation for what you meant about convenient timing.

Probably because lying about Jeremy Corbyn being an anti Semite disguises a lot of the actual cases of real anti semitism that go on daily. Sort of 'The boy who cried wolf' (not you personally) but which allows real cases of discrimination using violence to cause a proverbial shoulder shrug from people who should be taking notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Yet again you’re fucking lying. I was questioning how it was reported. Unfortunately there are anti-Semitic, racist, sexist etc attacks all the time. The DM made this particular attack headline news, made reference to Corbyn and Labour and had a comments section full of the usual slurs against him and Labour a day after the Tory leader had to face serious questions in PMQs. 

 

So why should these attacks not be headline news? Should they delay reporting them for some reason? What are these attacks which happen "all the time" but are apparently being ignored, until it's apparently convenient not to ignore them? Do you not think perhaps the fact they took place around Holocaust Memorial Day makes them extra newsworthy?

 

Here's the Daily Mail article about the attack on Wednesday. Not one mention of Corbyn or Labour in the article. Who is lying here?

 

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10447069/amp/Terrifying-moment-Jewish-shop-owners-suffer-random-anti-Semitic-attack-London-street.html

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

So why should these attacks not be headline news? Should they delay reporting them for some reason? What are these attacks which happen "all the time" but are apparently being ignored, until it's apparently convenient not to ignore them? Do you not think perhaps the fact they took place around Holocaust Memorial Day makes them extra newsworthy?

 

Here's the Daily Mail article about the attack on Wednesday. Not one mention of Corbyn or Labour in the article. Who is lying here?

 

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10447069/amp/Terrifying-moment-Jewish-shop-owners-suffer-random-anti-Semitic-attack-London-street.html

 

 

 

It’s clearly been edited probably because of a complaint. The article I read on the day mentioned Corbyn, you see unlike you I don’t lie and have no reason to lie.

Attacks happen all the time and are rarely headline news. This attack happened to be and I simply questioned the way they reported it. I’ve seen racist attacks reported a lot further down their usual articles. I’ve seen actual murders reported a lot further down. 
 

 


 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

It’s clearly been edited probably because of a complaint. The article I read on the day mentioned Corbyn, you see unlike you I don’t lie and have no reason to lie.

 

Well, isn't that convenient.

 

Still, at least I got negged about 10 times for questioning you over it, so every cloud eh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strontium said:

 

Well, isn't that convenient.

 

Still, at least I got negged about 10 times for questioning you over it, so every cloud eh.

You got negged because you’re a liar. 
 

Happy to help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

You got negged because you’re a liar. 
 

Happy to help. 

 

As a matter of fact, we've just established that you're the one making false claims here, concerning the content of an article. Along with a laughable excuse about it having been edited.

 

I could complain some more about it, but I don't want Jack the Dogfucker to accuse me of pretending to be outraged about racist attacks on innocent people again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

As a matter of fact, we've just established that you're the one making false claims here, concerning the content of an article. Along with a laughable excuse about it having been edited.

 

I could complain some more about it, but I don't want Jack the Dogfucker to accuse me of pretending to be outraged about racist attacks on innocent people again.

The article had been edited why on earth would I lie?

 

Complain more about what? Me negging you for blatantly mis-representing my post (as usual) like the lying prick you are? 
 

Its you who fucks dogs. It’s you who thinks it should be legal to touch them inappropriately. It’s you who doesn’t even wear a condom before going balls deep up Rex. It’s you who is a lying dog rattling weird freaky bastard. It’s you who tried to get someone sacked off here in real life. It’s you who is a sad narcissistic blert. You. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

The article had been edited why on earth would I lie?

 

Complain more about what? Me negging you for blatant mis-representing my post (as usual) like the lying prick you are? 
 

Its you who fucks dogs. It’s you who touches them in appropriately. It’s you who doesn’t even wear a condom before going balls deep up Rex. It’s you who is a lying dog rattling weird freaky bastard. It’s you who tried to get someone sacked off here in real life. It’s you who is a sad narcissistic blert. You. 

 

Well, who says you're lying? Maybe you're just mistaken. Unlike you I'm not willing to make claims beyond the known facts. Either way, the article DID NOT say what you said it did, and there's ZERO EVIDENCE it ever said what you say it did.

 

I didn't misrepresent anything. Rico mentioned racist abuse of Jews that happened yesterday, and you brought Corbyn into it, even though he had absolutely nothing to do with it. I made a joke about you mentioning Corbyn, and this was enough for you to go off half-cocked. Again.

 

So yes, you can just fuck right off. You've been trying to provoke me all week, endless little jibes in threads on everything from coronavirus to seagulls, and I've ignored it all week until today. More fool me for responding to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×