Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Freedom of Expression  (Read 1516 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Freedom of Expression
« on: June 03, 2020, 05:58:21 am »

I was saddend that the thread on the trashed camera shop was locked. I can understand that the topic drifted - most do without getting their balls cut off. I was also depressed to note the way in which my post had a single sentence picked out and held up as one thing, the while ignoring the very next sentence, that balanced the equation perfectly, and without which painted the first part in faux tonalities.

To me, it smacks of editorial nervousness on the one hand, and of tunnel vision and the instant reflexes of Pavlovian hounds on the other.

In short, it illustrates that the voicing of the alternative thought is not going to be appreciated here any longer; no more questions must be raised if they disturb political correctness. What a pity; welcome to the rosy world of anodyne.

Rob

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
    • advantica blog
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2020, 06:16:47 am »

Yes, it seems that the adherence to stuffy conventions is valued more than original or out-of-the-box thinking.
Logged

jeremyrh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2511
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2020, 06:54:58 am »

I'm not sure that pouring another bucket of slops into this cesspool of bigotry and ignorance qualifies as "out of the box thinking".
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2020, 07:26:14 am »

... "out of the box thinking".

Because you two et al control the box, allowing only those "thoughts" that color within the lines. And now you want to control what escapes too?

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2020, 07:52:02 am »

I was saddend that the thread on the trashed camera shop was locked. I can understand that the topic drifted - most do without getting their balls cut off. I was also depressed to note the way in which my post had a single sentence picked out and held up as one thing, the while ignoring the very next sentence, that balanced the equation perfectly, and without which painted the first part in faux tonalities.

To me, it smacks of editorial nervousness on the one hand, and of tunnel vision and the instant reflexes of Pavlovian hounds on the other.

In short, it illustrates that the voicing of the alternative thought is not going to be appreciated here any longer; no more questions must be raised if they disturb political correctness. What a pity; welcome to the rosy world of anodyne.

Rob

How was I meant to react to the next sentence when that sentence read that you had "no idea worth squat about how that same topic is seen in black homes."

Bad enough that you "doubt that there truly, honestly exists a white father or brother who rejoices at the thought of his daughter/sister travelling the path into racial integration" but to suggest that such a male doesn't exist is beyond belief. And why limit this racist attitude to the male of the species?
« Last Edit: June 03, 2020, 08:54:09 am by KLaban »
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2020, 09:04:23 am »

Because you two et al control the box, allowing only those "thoughts" that color within the lines. And now you want to control what escapes too?

Freedom of Expression on LuLa is only limited by what is deemed acceptable by the moderator and owners.

Criticism of what any of us express is open to all.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2020, 10:02:12 am »

How was I meant to react to the next sentence when that sentence read that you had "no idea worth squat about how that same topic is seen in black homes."

Bad enough that you "doubt that there truly, honestly exists a white father or brother who rejoices at the thought of his daughter/sister travelling the path into racial integration" but to suggest that such a male doesn't exist is beyond belief. And why limit this bigotry to the male of the species?

You weren't particularly meant to react one way or another; at best, I might be forgiven for expecting you to consider that it might not be a unidirectional emotion. Have you much understanding or first-hand experience about how blacks view interracial affairs? I haven't, which is why I thought it interesting, at least as interesting as the white perspective might be. I would be the last to base opinion on a couple of close-friend examples, should there be any. Those could be the least likely to reveal their soul to a white friend - if they value keeping that connection alive. There may be further interesting lessons to learn about interracial relations and love from the late Dr Mugabe and also from the equally late General Amin and his driving of the Asians out if his Africa. And they are just the first obvious ones: think Rwanda if you like the taste of brotherly love.

Also, and I think importantly, I wrote that I had that doubt; not for a moment is that tantamount to declaring that you will definitively not find one example of opposite thinking to mine in this wide, overpopulated world.

Whether this is male or female specific is kind of irrelevant, unless you expect a writer to furnish a complete list of all the options for every single thing that he mentions. Would you say that if you like a Jaguar you are also obliged to say, just for clarity, that you also like Mustangs, Corvettes and BMWs - assuming, always, that you do?

It's interesting that raising a question you don't like is bigotry. Why not, instead, come up with an argument as to why you believe interracial marriage is some kind of desirable silver bullet? And of course, why it is bound to lead to a happy, relatively stress-free life for your child or sibling? Which is what I image any close relative would desire above all else.

You know, this knee-jerk reaction is the kind of thing that gets the US Democratic people their bad rep. It shows an immediate desire to cling to some ethical position that has been promoted as the "correct" one, all else being the games of Lucifer himself. It has shown itself throughout all the other political debates or arguments that LuLa has managed to host in the CC. Not surprisingly, the Republican camp fares no better: it, too, simply repeats mantras, but different ones. It's why I no longer have faith in a single British party: the middle-ground of politics has vanished, to be replaced by extremism on both sides of the spectrum. It can only lead to more death and eventual defeat at the hand of an external power such as Islam or China. And before knickers are wetted not through desire but through outrage, I hasten to add that I am fairly confident that not all Mohammedans are bent on conquest and the death of the white Satans which is not to deny, either, that many are absolutely of that belief and wish.

As some know, I am a daily viewer of the French English-language tv station france24.com because they touch on aspects of international news that the Beeb and Sky News are mostly both too parochial or too strung out on the single big issue of the day to visit. The debates are usually quite well balanced, with speakers with several differing viewpoints and political leanings. I watched yesterday, and was truly disappointed by what I saw. The debate was about the US riots of now, and the point was made by the host that looting and destroying cars etc, had little to do with the killing of that black chap by a policeman who, it turns out, has a record of improper behaviour. That could not be accepted by a single one of the three other speakers: to two men and a female, they adopted the misleading line that you can't equate a looting with a life (which equation was not being made, and exactly the very same tactic that Kay Burley also faced in her recent news slot), and that it's only big companies, anyway, that get hit (clearly, neither are they readers of LuLa nor camera fans, those three). A demonstration, if you like, that capitalism is evil, that you can rob from it any time you like, and that that's okay. Go steal a Rolex, the motherfucker can always buy another. You get the photo.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2020, 10:03:09 am »

Freedom of Expression on LuLa is only limited by what is deemed acceptable by the moderator and owners.

Criticism of what any of us express is open to all.

Until it's no longer open to anyone.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2020, 10:04:23 am »

I'm not sure that pouring another bucket of slops into this cesspool of bigotry and ignorance qualifies as "out of the box thinking".


So easy to write; so facile and ultimately meaningless. What is it about the airing of a reality that disturbs your comfort zone that leads to instant dismissal?

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2020, 10:17:34 am »

Until it's no longer open to anyone.

That is a matter for the owners.

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2020, 10:23:36 am »


So easy to write; so facile and ultimately meaningless. What is it about the airing of a reality that disturbs your comfort zone that leads to instant dismissal?

Since when have your subjective opinions been reality?

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2020, 12:40:20 pm »

You weren't particularly meant to react one way or another; at best, I might be forgiven for expecting you to consider that it might not be a unidirectional emotion. Have you much understanding or first-hand experience about how blacks view interracial affairs? I haven't, which is why I thought it interesting, at least as interesting as the white perspective might be. I would be the last to base opinion on a couple of close-friend examples, should there be any. Those could be the least likely to reveal their soul to a white friend - if they value keeping that connection alive. There may be further interesting lessons to learn about interracial relations and love from the late Dr Mugabe and also from the equally late General Amin and his driving of the Asians out if his Africa. And they are just the first obvious ones: think Rwanda if you like the taste of brotherly love.

Also, and I think importantly, I wrote that I had that doubt; not for a moment is that tantamount to declaring that you will definitively not find one example of opposite thinking to mine in this wide, overpopulated world.

Whether this is male or female specific is kind of irrelevant, unless you expect a writer to furnish a complete list of all the options for every single thing that he mentions. Would you say that if you like a Jaguar you are also obliged to say, just for clarity, that you also like Mustangs, Corvettes and BMWs - assuming, always, that you do?

It's interesting that raising a question you don't like is bigotry. Why not, instead, come up with an argument as to why you believe interracial marriage is some kind of desirable silver bullet? And of course, why it is bound to lead to a happy, relatively stress-free life for your child or sibling? Which is what I image any close relative would desire above all else.

You know, this knee-jerk reaction is the kind of thing that gets the US Democratic people their bad rep. It shows an immediate desire to cling to some ethical position that has been promoted as the "correct" one, all else being the games of Lucifer himself. It has shown itself throughout all the other political debates or arguments that LuLa has managed to host in the CC. Not surprisingly, the Republican camp fares no better: it, too, simply repeats mantras, but different ones. It's why I no longer have faith in a single British party: the middle-ground of politics has vanished, to be replaced by extremism on both sides of the spectrum. It can only lead to more death and eventual defeat at the hand of an external power such as Islam or China. And before knickers are wetted not through desire but through outrage, I hasten to add that I am fairly confident that not all Mohammedans are bent on conquest and the death of the white Satans which is not to deny, either, that many are absolutely of that belief and wish.

As some know, I am a daily viewer of the French English-language tv station france24.com because they touch on aspects of international news that the Beeb and Sky News are mostly both too parochial or too strung out on the single big issue of the day to visit. The debates are usually quite well balanced, with speakers with several differing viewpoints and political leanings. I watched yesterday, and was truly disappointed by what I saw. The debate was about the US riots of now, and the point was made by the host that looting and destroying cars etc, had little to do with the killing of that black chap by a policeman who, it turns out, has a record of improper behaviour. That could not be accepted by a single one of the three other speakers: to two men and a female, they adopted the misleading line that you can't equate a looting with a life (which equation was not being made, and exactly the very same tactic that Kay Burley also faced in her recent news slot), and that it's only big companies, anyway, that get hit (clearly, neither are they readers of LuLa nor camera fans, those three). A demonstration, if you like, that capitalism is evil, that you can rob from it any time you like, and that that's okay. Go steal a Rolex, the motherfucker can always buy another. You get the photo.

I’ll quote the lot but most is the usual rambling straw man argument or semantics.

I'm sick and tired of those who question sexual and racial prejudice being described as the "politically correct".

We get it, Rob, women should stay at home and raise children, your glamour calendar projects were scuppered by the politically correct, homosexuality is not to be recommended and it’s advisable that those from different origins should not interbreed.

Suffice to say and weird perhaps, but I refuse to differentiate between people - in general and those my wife and I know - by the colour of their skin or their sexuality.

Frans Waterlander

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 873
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2020, 12:48:50 pm »


So easy to write; so facile and ultimately meaningless. What is it about the airing of a reality that disturbs your comfort zone that leads to instant dismissal?
Come on, Rob! Take a deep breath and count to 100,000. Feeling better now?
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2020, 03:42:42 pm »

I’ll quote the lot but most is the usual rambling straw man argument or semantics.

I'm sick and tired of those who question sexual and racial prejudice being described as the "politically correct".

We get it, Rob, women should stay at home and raise children, your glamour calendar projects were scuppered by the politically correct, homosexuality is not to be recommended and it’s advisable that those from different origins should not interbreed.

Suffice to say and weird perhaps, but I refuse to differentiate between people - in general and those my wife and I know - by the colour of their skin or their sexuality.

Which as far as I am concerned, is your right so to think and to act. I wasn't saying otherwise; I was asking questions that you and some others don't want to consider and certainly refuse to attempt to answer. That's perfectly fine, I get it, but I reserve the right to think others might have different perspectives. Freedom, non?

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2451
    • Keith Laban Photography
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2020, 04:36:28 pm »

Which as far as I am concerned, is your right so to think and to act. I wasn't saying otherwise; I was asking questions that you and some others don't want to consider and certainly refuse to attempt to answer. That's perfectly fine, I get it, but I reserve the right to think others might have different perspectives. Freedom, non?

You are free to say whatever you want here - within any constraints of the moderator - as I am to comment.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #15 on: June 03, 2020, 04:40:29 pm »

You are free to say whatever you want here - within any constraints of the moderator - as I am to comment.


Perfect: we both agree on the final word!

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2020, 04:09:12 am »

Well, well! Yet another thought-provoking, important good thread is closed down. I speak of the "Myths" one.

Slobodan showed a very pertinent quotation about the demographic that eschews counter-argument and bang, down came the hammer of political correctness!

This site has been castrated; we may as well stop posting words and thoughts and expect nothing more than endless postings of alternative versions of the same old photo. We should just buy the contact sheet and be done.

Have another good, soporific day!

Rob

elliot_n

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1219
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2020, 04:25:00 am »

Hopefully this thread will go the same way.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #18 on: June 05, 2020, 06:57:58 am »

Hopefully this thread will go the same way.

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
    • advantica blog
Re: Freedom of Expression
« Reply #19 on: June 05, 2020, 07:14:35 am »

Last night, I dreamt that some lunatic hacked into one member's account and created ten new threads, some addressed to individual posters, but all with zero replies.
It all seemed very real, but fortunately, when I woke up and opened the forum site, I realized it was just a bad dream.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up