"Republicunt": why use terms like this?

[FFaith]

Because there's no point in being effective or inoffensive if what you're saying is bullshit.

There's a difference between bullshit and discretion. Bullshit hijaks the principle of your message, whereas discretion is about conveying it an appropriate matter for the audience you are addressing. We 'format' our messages all the time: if a prof asks for a 1500 word essay, I'll give them that many words even if I had 3000 words to say. If I'm getting a passport photo taken, I won't smile even if I usually like to smile. If I'm trying to explain something to my 4 year old cousin, it will be in a different manner than if I'm trying to explain something to a classmate.

These are very simple examples, but the more complex a task you are trying to accomplish the more this applies. If I'm trying to get a job, I may be perfectly qualified and honest but I'm not going to say the same things in the job interview that I would chatting with a friend - that's not what the HR person wants to hear about. Similarly, if I'm trying to broach a sensitive topic like politics with someone who I disagree with, finding common ground first can open the door to further discussion. Alienating them ends the conversation. Words are powerful, and if you imagine what your words will accomplish before you use them you will create a lot more opportunities.

It's not being dishonest - it's saying the right things at the right time. I do not lie (except in mafia of course ) but I do choose my words carefully.

---

I've always thought there is a purpose to the overuse of insults towards conservatives here, to make atheist forums an unfriendly place towards them as possible.

That is quite possible - I've observed that this is one of the instrumental uses of insults.

If that's the case I'm disappointed with AF, because I want to talk to conservatives if they are willing. If we're going to be anything better than an echo chamber, we have to. From my experience it is so powerful to understand the people who you disagree with - to know how they think, to understand their paradigm and see what it's missing. Especially when you are disagreeing with a very powerful force, you can't pretend that they aren't there, or you will continually lose and not know why.

And I think we're rationally right by so much as atheists that there's no reason to try to keep conservatives out. Chasing away dissenters is something you have reason to do when you're a bully trying to look tough, not when you can so easily defend your view rationally and objectively.

Good points. Some people here come off as hateful to anyone that disagrees with them. Not just hateful to the conservatives that disagree with them, but also now the progressives that politely disagree with them. Progressives are now considered pieces of shit for not falling in line, and the level of hate is getting a little sad I think. I agree with you that we should be trying to understand each other better rather than just calling each other names, because that's counterproductive. I can understand calling someone like Ted Cruz a cunt, or calling someone on the forum a cunt or retard if they come on here telling us that we're going to bow the knee and be sorry when we find out God is real, or when someone comes on here saying horrible things about gay people, or when someone comes on here and says horrible things about black people. Calling them a cunt makes sense then. I don't like the idea of calling every conservative that comes along a cunt though. The same goes for religious people. I like to be respectful to them and actually try to understand their perspective about things rather than just insulting them. If the religious person is actually trying to have a decent discussion and just put their point across, I can respect that and return the favour.

[henryp]

Your personality is offputting. 

Not as offputting as yours. You do appear to be full of shit. I don't think you're a cunt but the fact you define me as offputting because I don't avoid speaking my mind is very offputting to me.

Besides, my personality is my best feature . . . I haven't got much else going for me.

The fact you find the way I speak offputting and therefore you conclude that my personality is offputting . . . is what I find especially offputting about you as a person right now. As if the way I am speaking my mind on this thread sums up my 'personality'.

I'm sure there's more to your personality than appearing to be disingenuous and anti-honesty, and having problems with people speak their mind because you don't like certain offensive words. I'm sure there's more to your personality than bad analogies and silly straw men. But, no, my personality is not offputting. Anybody who actually gets to know me tends to think I'm a nice guy. I don't always have to come across as polite to have a nice personality. I'm going to come across as disagreeable when I'm being blunt and when I'm standing up for my opinion that it's okay to use nasty words and mean them and it's also okay to say them when you think them rather than trade them for words that sugarcoat what you actually mean.

Regarding the bolded, if you feel your personality is your best feature with little else going for you, how important does that make it that you view your personality as a positive?

[John V]

So.... Min walks into a bar and sits next to a catholic conservative republican ex-priest and former CEO police officer.  

What happens next?

Probably nothing. Plenty of RL pussies talk big on the internet.

[Minimalist]

I don't go to bars.  Too many republicunt shitheads like A/M there getting drunk to cover up their disappointments in life.

You must be so proud of Roy Moore, eh A/M.  One of your boys.

[LadyForCamus]

Because there's no point in being effective or inoffensive if what you're saying is bullshit.

There's a difference between bullshit and discretion. Bullshit hijaks the principle of your message, whereas discretion is about conveying it an appropriate matter for the audience you are addressing. We 'format' our messages all the time: if a prof asks for a 1500 word essay, I'll give them that many words even if I had 3000 words to say. If I'm getting a passport photo taken, I won't smile even if I usually like to smile. If I'm trying to explain something to my 4 year old cousin, it will be in a different manner than if I'm trying to explain something to a classmate.

These are very simple examples, but the more complex a task you are trying to accomplish the more this applies. If I'm trying to get a job, I may be perfectly qualified and honest but I'm not going to say the same things in the job interview that I would chatting with a friend - that's not what the HR person wants to hear about. Similarly, if I'm trying to broach a sensitive topic like politics with someone who I disagree with, finding common ground first can open the door to further discussion. Alienating them ends the conversation. Words are powerful, and if you imagine what your words will accomplish before you use them you will create a lot more opportunities.

It's not being dishonest - it's saying the right things at the right time. I do not lie (except in mafia of course ) but I do choose my words carefully.

---

I've always thought there is a purpose to the overuse of insults towards conservatives here, to make atheist forums an unfriendly place towards them as possible.

That is quite possible - I've observed that this is one of the instrumental uses of insults.

If that's the case I'm disappointed with AF, because I want to talk to conservatives if they are willing. If we're going to be anything better than an echo chamber, we have to. From my experience it is so powerful to understand the people who you disagree with - to know how they think, to understand their paradigm and see what it's missing. Especially when you are disagreeing with a very powerful force, you can't pretend that they aren't there, or you will continually lose and not know why.

And I think we're rationally right by so much as atheists that there's no reason to try to keep conservatives out. Chasing away dissenters is something you have reason to do when you're a bully trying to look tough, not when you can so easily defend your view rationally and objectively.

I was awesome at bullshitting my way through essays and papers in school. Deep down I'm a B student, but I always got A's.  😁

[Amarok]

Should Neo start posting about snowflakes again?

If by posting you mean lying and distorting and leaving out critical information from articles he posts  then displaying his ignorance. Then yes it was a laugh the first time . And right after i''ll start a long long long list of right wing Christian snowflake behavior lots and lots of that .

[Edwardo Piet]

I'm not talking about the OP position.  I'm talking about the other discussion you engaged in about using phrases that are the primary slur to dehumanize various subgroups, and whether or not that's okay.  Retard, Faggot, Cunt, etc...  

You can say "I called a person retarded, but I didn't mean intellectually disabled" so the mentally disabled population shouldn't take offense.  Even though the reason you using retarded is considered an insult at all, is because it's association with dehumanizing the mentally disabled.  

If I put the confederate flag on top of my car's roof because I like the Dukes of Hazard, it's absurd to think because my intent is to show I'm a fan of a tv show, black people getting offended because I'm displaying a symbol under which their ancestors were enslaved is now moot?  It's just a laughable level of self-absorption to come to that conclusion.

--

Now to answer my guess at "Why?" that Shadow asked.  Your personality is offputting.  But if you frame calling people Cunts as a virtue, as it's part of your noble goal to unabashedly present the truth, then who's fault is it that people find you offputting?  You're really a victim to your own lofty principles in that scenario.  Others are just too weak and lack the backbone to call a spade a spade, as you say.  If my brain were trying to spin reality to help me cope, I'd hope it could come up with something as good as that.

The problem with the story is that it invests you pretty heavily in the conclusion calling people cunts and retarded is a noble action.  And that's where I think you're ability to look at things objectively gets 'cut off at the knees.'  You can't be the tortured hero if you're causing unnecessary harm to large groups of innocent people because it's super important you call someone a Cunt instead of a Jerk.  You could have said "Fuck them.  I don't care if the intellectually disabled are offended." but that doesn't fit the narrative.  Instead you went with "They shouldn't be offended."  Once again, your alleged flaw is not a flaw at all, and actually the fault of someone else's shortcoming.  In this case their taking offense when they shouldn't.

Obviously, this is all wild and mostly unfounded guessing.  But I find this sort of thing very interesting.

I've actually been bold enough to call a spade a spade before where he's concerned but you know... instead of dealing with the reality of the situation, there was blameshifting and denial all the way around. So much for that honesty, right? 

You don't seem to understand what 'dishonesty' is . . . it wouldn't mean that I expressed opinions that you consider to be bullshit. It would mean that I expressed opinions that I do consider to be bullshit. If I express some intention and fail to follow through with it you seem to take that as dishonesty too even when I honestly tried to follow through with it

I do notice that the (few) people who don't recognize me as an honest person don't seem to even grasp the basic concept of honesty.

[shadow]

I've actually been bold enough to call a spade a spade before where he's concerned but you know... instead of dealing with the reality of the situation, there was blameshifting and denial all the way around. So much for that honesty, right? 

You don't seem to understand what 'dishonesty' is . . . it wouldn't mean that I expressed opinions that you consider to be bullshit. It would mean that I expressed opinions that I do consider to be bullshit. If I express some intention and fail to follow through with it you seem to take that as dishonesty too even when I honestly tried to follow through with it

I do notice that the (few) people who don't recognize me as an honest person don't seem to even grasp the basic concept of honesty.

Hammy, do you think it's possible that you may portray things in a light that makes you look better, subconsciously even?

[Joods]

I've actually been bold enough to call a spade a spade before where he's concerned but you know... instead of dealing with the reality of the situation, there was blameshifting and denial all the way around. So much for that honesty, right? 

You don't seem to understand what 'dishonesty' is . . . it wouldn't mean that I expressed opinions that you consider to be bullshit. It would mean that I expressed opinions that I do consider to be bullshit. If I express some intention and fail to follow through with it you seem to take that as dishonesty too even when I honestly tried to follow through with it

I do notice that the (few) people who don't recognize me as an honest person don't seem to even grasp the basic concept of honesty.

Actually I have no problem with grasping the basic concept of honesty. I also have no problem with calling out bullshit when I see it, as I already have. Just look at your response to what I said above.  

I've been on this earth far longer than you. By your own admittance to me in the past, you are naive and don't have the experience of interaction with many people. So naturally, I can see where you automatically go into the defensive whenever someone says something you don't like. This is the part where you take your almost 30-something self and grow up and stop trying to twist things around because your post above is very dishonest. I mean I really don't care what lies you want to feed other people. But if you can't be straight up honest with yourself, then that's on you and you really shouldn't walk around touting to be one thing when clearly you aren't that thing. 

As for the "few" people who don't recognize you as an honest person - I see far less people coming to your defense and having your back. What I see is many people staying silent, not wanting to get involved because, quite frankly, no one feels like dealing with your already fragile feelings. As for me - I think this does need to be addressed - even if I'm one of the few to do it. 

I'm not intentionally trying to upset you or hurt you. I'm just keeping it real, like you want from people. Understand that no one - not even yourself - can be so infallible that you are that pure, that honest. To go around here making the claim that you are a champion for honesty is in itself, dishonest. And it's just pure bullshit if you think you are that perfect of a person that you are never dishonest. That's saying you never lie and I know for a fact that that's not true. So how about we cut the bullshit and be real here.

[CapnAwesome]

Because there's no point in being effective or inoffensive if what you're saying is bullshit.

There's a difference between bullshit and discretion. Bullshit hijaks the principle of your message, whereas discretion is about conveying it an appropriate matter for the audience you are addressing. We 'format' our messages all the time: if a prof asks for a 1500 word essay, I'll give them that many words even if I had 3000 words to say. If I'm getting a passport photo taken, I won't smile even if I usually like to smile. If I'm trying to explain something to my 4 year old cousin, it will be in a different manner than if I'm trying to explain something to a classmate.

These are very simple examples, but the more complex a task you are trying to accomplish the more this applies. If I'm trying to get a job, I may be perfectly qualified and honest but I'm not going to say the same things in the job interview that I would chatting with a friend - that's not what the HR person wants to hear about. Similarly, if I'm trying to broach a sensitive topic like politics with someone who I disagree with, finding common ground first can open the door to further discussion. Alienating them ends the conversation. Words are powerful, and if you imagine what your words will accomplish before you use them you will create a lot more opportunities.

It's not being dishonest - it's saying the right things at the right time. I do not lie (except in mafia of course ) but I do choose my words carefully.

---

I've always thought there is a purpose to the overuse of insults towards conservatives here, to make atheist forums an unfriendly place towards them as possible.

That is quite possible - I've observed that this is one of the instrumental uses of insults.

If that's the case I'm disappointed with AF, because I want to talk to conservatives if they are willing. If we're going to be anything better than an echo chamber, we have to. From my experience it is so powerful to understand the people who you disagree with - to know how they think, to understand their paradigm and see what it's missing. Especially when you are disagreeing with a very powerful force, you can't pretend that they aren't there, or you will continually lose and not know why.

And I think we're rationally right by so much as atheists that there's no reason to try to keep conservatives out. Chasing away dissenters is something you have reason to do when you're a bully trying to look tough, not when you can so easily defend your view rationally and objectively.

It's so nice to hear this as a reply. I've said the same thing for a while here, and normally am subjected to a bunch of denial or ironically, insults.