The Hydra ~ Caro rears her head again

[London Dave]

I nver make speeling mistakes, ony typographical errors!

[Pied Piper]

Fair comment Mike. I accept that and sorry magpiemad. But I'll plead provocation on account of the continued insults aimed at me personally on the basis of what I do, and for having an opinion that differs to others.

[MagpieMad]

so where are all these insults??? what provocation on account of the continued insults aimed at you?

[Joe]

Hopefully I havent insulted you or your profession.I just view it as something not to be taken seriously in most cases.Your writings may be different,I cant comment until I have the pleasure or displeasure of reading them.I am just being open minded.Please do not take offence.

[Mike]

How come your quotes never work Joe? I've noticed that before.

How do you quote? Just click on the quote button?

[Pied Piper]

LMAO!
"The fact that you can't accept that without resorting to insults makes me think perhaps you're the one with the issues" who's insulting who???? you post in a thread about about a percieved gender related issue, you then label all and sundary as "ignorant and prejudiced" and then try to fob off the insult as mine???. your rant in here about her being called "names" is just that, a rant, and had very little to do with this thread except in YOUR head.
as for me being prejudiced against journo's, wouldn't have even come up had you not started with the "ignorant and prejudiced" line. I have no problems with being prejudiced against journo's, its a heavy load to bear, but I'll manage.
"I just don't believe in using peoples gender, race or anything else in order to make a point." which wasn't the case in the first place. I don't have any gender or racism issue's at all, I grew up in Australia's most multicutural community and could care less about a person's race or gender, I call all m8.

I didn't say it was you making those comments, magpiemad. You didn't enter this thread until after I became involved. When you did you decided to reduce it to an attack on what I do, by saying it "smacks of one journalist defending another". Guilty as charged, your honour. That's not in my head - just read your own post.

And Magpie Joe, of course there are writers who are in it for the bucks, just like in any job, but there are plenty of others who write for less mercenary reasons. I'm writing a book at the moment, and believe me I'm not doing it for the money. When I write on this forum, I'm just like you - another guy with an opinion. Everyone's a critic.

I accept I've diverted the thread from what it originally was - largely because people took exception to me having the temerity to defend Wilson and her contribution to AFL in the first place. I accept that people don't like her for how she talks about Collingwood and that they think that's unprofessional.

But I stand by my original comments. The fundamental point I'm making is, if you don't like what someone has to say, attack the point they're making, don't base the attack on who that person is. It's easy to attack that opinion as PC, wanting to save the world, hypocritical or whatever, much harder to actually address the issue seriously - as has been shown here.

The Weed

[Joe]

Thats what I do mike

[Joe]

I am serious weed.
If I call a male a derogatory comment using a term that only a male can be involved in am I sexist.You knew what I meant earlier but you stuck to the letter of the law so to speak.

[MagpieMad]

" accept that and sorry magpiemad. But I'll plead provocation on account of the continued insults aimed at me personally on the basis of what I do, and for having an opinion that differs to others."
so whats that about then?
and I couldn't agree more on this "you don't like what someone has to say, attack the point they're making, don't base the attack on who that person is."
yet your "ignorant and prejudiced" doesn't quite fit in with that does it.....
I can't help it if your going to get all upsett and insulted every time a journo is bagged.

[Joe]

I love your Avator MM.
You are the king of the avators mate.lol
Its not that much of a wasteland after all.lol

[Pied Piper]

I'm not trying to avoid what you said Magpie Joe. I answered you on the previous page.

This is getting to be a fairly esoteric argument (maybe one for the Tavern rather than here) but I'll try again to explain my point. I'm as serious as Magpie Joe is and I don't want to be misunderstood.

We use terms like dog/bitch/slut as a way of putting women down, just as we use terms like [snip] to put black people down. It's the same principle. I'm not aware of any terms specifically invented to put men down ("wanker" certainly doesn't qualify - what is a term that only a male can be involved in?) You might say "prick", but that's more general, it's not used to insult someone on the basis of their gender. Yet, when we really dislike someone, we might use the C-word for greater effect.

Hope that makes it clearer.

[Pied Piper]

I can't help it if your going to get all upsett and insulted every time a journo is bagged.

OK, but you make generalisations by insulting journos as an entire group and profession. And you used that to score a point against me (just as - and I'm sorry about this - I retaliated by correcting your spelling). That's beside the main point of what I was saying, but I don't think that was a fair argument to use on your part - it was, well, ignorant and prejudiced!

Like I keep saying, attack the argument, not the person.

[MagpieMad]

clear as mud.
ROTFLMAO

[Joe]

I dont appreciate terms like dog,bitch or slut being used about women.
I have called my female partners sweetie in an affectionate way and also in unfriendly ways I guess during an argument. I still fail to see how that makes me a sexist pig who deserves to burn in hell with pitch forks up my crack lol. lmao.

[Pied Piper]

magpiemad, would you accept this fundamental point: if you disagree with them, attack a person's point of view - not the person they are. Does that help?