|
|
XD (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} exdee) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} otf_wank,@ 2006-07-30 18:32:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Small but vicious...I think I'll call it bitey! Or, metaquotes wank!
supremegoddess1 drops by with a humourous anecdote by felisdemens about a crazy Russian hairdresser. Ethnic stereotype!wank? Only in C_S. No, kali921 takes offense at supremegoddess1's admittably squickable icon. (For those of you who went to look and got grossed out anyway, I warned you.)
kali921:
And you think it is amusing to use a gruesome depiction of a dead person with what I'm sure you think is a witty caption in a public comm exactly why?
It's insensitive, at best, to mock someone's death in such a fashion.
supremegoddess1:
*shrug*
your opinion.
for me, it's a biting commentary on the callousness of the bush administration and its general disregard for others.
but that's just me.
jencindiary:
Some folks just don't know how to act right.
kali921:
No, they sure don't. If by right you mean actually having sense to think 1) oh, maybe I shouldn't post graphic, gruesome content in a public comm without warning people and 2) oh, hey, what would happen if Dead Iraqi's Civilian family/friends/whatever saw that icon with my mocking caption?
No. No, surely, wise friend, you couldn't have meant that.
supremegoddess1:
Oooh, I love it when people get self-righteous over icons. Really beats getting upset about the important things in life, doesn't it?
tzikeh:
Oooh, I love it when people get self-righteous over icons. Really beats getting upset about the important things in life, doesn't it?
Ugh, the straw-man tactic. What makes these two things mutually exclusive? Someone who gets self-righteous (I'd use words like *angry* or *upset*, but whatever) over your icon obviously doesn't care about more important things, like the war? Ridiculous, specious argument. Please. And you know what? I'm *for* being able to use any icon you want. I'm also for people being able to tell you exactly what they think of your icon. You don't get to have it all your way.
stagger_lee77:
hi! i'm the jerk that made the icon!! *waves*
maybe it *is* insensitive. but, since i was there when it happened... the "no brainer!" quip is more about how the guy died, not the fact that he's dead. first of all, that's not an iraqi "civilian". that's an armed insurgent. the guy was carrying a weapon and (stupidly) tried to fire that weapon at a tracked vehicle. guess what? that's pretty stupid.
someone else commented that it could be offensive to someone that lost a husband/son/brother/male relative in iraq. i could mention how it's not only males dying or getting wounded "over there" and that i find that remark callous, but i won't because it's just not that important to me.
personally, i try not to use that icon in LJ comms because i know some people find it it offensive. i don't really find it offensive or gruesome. maybe that says something about me and what i've been through. oh well. it's done, you've seen it, been disgusted by it, life goes on.
kali921:
Hi! Yes, I see you are the insensitive jerk that made the icon by your comment!
Who or what the guy was in life doesn't matter to me. I mean, do you know for sure that he was an insurgent?
Regardless, it doesn't matter. I certainly don't think people should go through life in denial of the horrors of war. But non-combatants should be given a choice as to whether or not they get to look at gruesome content on the internet. LJ, after all, is a service for those as young as thirteen years old, but its TOS. Do you really think it's a good idea to shove that into their faces because of your self-righteous crusade to show what happens to people that shoot on what you think is the wrong side of the war?
You and the OP didn't give people a choice. You shoved an image of a man with his head exploded all over the sidewalk in our faces in a public community, where thirteen and fourteen year olds might see it, or those that simply don't want to look at it.
Your comment also blows the OP's idiotic "well, it's a comment on the brutality of the Bush administration" excuse right out of the water, because here you're telling me that it's okay to do the icon, because, gasp, he was an enemy.
Your stance is, at best, in extremely poor taste.
In other words, you lack judgement.
stagger_lee77:
actually, yes, yes i do know he was an insurgent. he fired a small arms weapon on an american tracked vehicle. in running up to the vehicle, he was crushed by the vehicle. if am american did that and was run over by an iraqi T-52, it would still be stupid. that's like bringing a knife to a gun fight. thus, the "no brainer" quip.
but since you didn't read the rest of my comment before you decided on an ad hominem attack on me based on the fact that i created said icon... you didn't see the part where i stated that i don't use it in public communities. i use it all the time in my LJ, but i make it a point not to use it in comms because it does have a certain squick factor to it. what the OP did with my icon after she snagged it from me is her business. i understand your point about 13 and 14 year old seeing it, but i can only back you on that view when it comes to public communities. if that same minor stumbles across it on my personal LJ, that's not my problem. no 13 year old should be reading my journal anyway.
kali921:
What part of me stating that I didn't care how he died for the purposes of this discussion did you not understand? People are driven by passion and emotionalism to do things that you might deem stupid all of the time. It's sad that you're so desensitized, perhaps to the point of totally lacking empathy. But don't play the "what I've been through" card here for excusing your lack of foresight, dear. There are plenty of people here that have been through what you have, and likely very much worse.
Mocking those that die in a pretty gruesome fashion in war. Way to go, you, way to be a good, humane person.
The "no brainer" quip has nothing to do with the fact that his brains were spread all over the pavement? You seriously stretch credibility here to the point of non-existence.
If you think that icon only has a "certain" squick factor, I'd hate to see what you think has real squick factor to it.
As for the righteous proclamation that no thirteen year old should be reading your LJ, perhaps, to be prudent and considerate, put that in your user info rather than here? Young people are all over LJ, randomly clicking through everywhere, places where they probably shouldn't be, probably lacking a responsible adult monitoring their internet surfing experience.
I never said you shouldn't use that icon on your own LJ. My comments pertain to the wisdom of posting it here in a public community.
Still, at best, the content in your beloved icon is in poor taste. Objectionable, even.
stagger_lee77:
oh wow. you actually went through and read my user info?
did you bother to read the first thing that's linked there? there's a reason why it's linked to my user page--it is my disclaimer. if you didn't, maybe you should go back and read it. in fact, i implore you to go back and read it. i've never claimed to be good or humane.
i think your issue of it being posted in a public community is reasonable. but, uh... i have now told you twice that i haven't used it in a public community. therefore, your issue isn't with me.
oh well, i'm gonna run. i'm off to go tell a group of kids that bambi's mother dies by the end of the movie.
They're calling forstagger_lee77's head on a platter wank in the thread underneath. I can only hope to placate them with their very own otf writeup.
supremegoddess1 drops by with a humourous anecdote by felisdemens about a crazy Russian hairdresser. Ethnic stereotype!wank? Only in C_S. No, kali921 takes offense at supremegoddess1's admittably squickable icon. (For those of you who went to look and got grossed out anyway, I warned you.)
kali921:
And you think it is amusing to use a gruesome depiction of a dead person with what I'm sure you think is a witty caption in a public comm exactly why?
It's insensitive, at best, to mock someone's death in such a fashion.
supremegoddess1:
*shrug*
your opinion.
for me, it's a biting commentary on the callousness of the bush administration and its general disregard for others.
but that's just me.
jencindiary:
Some folks just don't know how to act right.
kali921:
No, they sure don't. If by right you mean actually having sense to think 1) oh, maybe I shouldn't post graphic, gruesome content in a public comm without warning people and 2) oh, hey, what would happen if Dead Iraqi's Civilian family/friends/whatever saw that icon with my mocking caption?
No. No, surely, wise friend, you couldn't have meant that.
supremegoddess1:
Oooh, I love it when people get self-righteous over icons. Really beats getting upset about the important things in life, doesn't it?
tzikeh:
Oooh, I love it when people get self-righteous over icons. Really beats getting upset about the important things in life, doesn't it?
Ugh, the straw-man tactic. What makes these two things mutually exclusive? Someone who gets self-righteous (I'd use words like *angry* or *upset*, but whatever) over your icon obviously doesn't care about more important things, like the war? Ridiculous, specious argument. Please. And you know what? I'm *for* being able to use any icon you want. I'm also for people being able to tell you exactly what they think of your icon. You don't get to have it all your way.
stagger_lee77:
hi! i'm the jerk that made the icon!! *waves*
maybe it *is* insensitive. but, since i was there when it happened... the "no brainer!" quip is more about how the guy died, not the fact that he's dead. first of all, that's not an iraqi "civilian". that's an armed insurgent. the guy was carrying a weapon and (stupidly) tried to fire that weapon at a tracked vehicle. guess what? that's pretty stupid.
someone else commented that it could be offensive to someone that lost a husband/son/brother/male relative in iraq. i could mention how it's not only males dying or getting wounded "over there" and that i find that remark callous, but i won't because it's just not that important to me.
personally, i try not to use that icon in LJ comms because i know some people find it it offensive. i don't really find it offensive or gruesome. maybe that says something about me and what i've been through. oh well. it's done, you've seen it, been disgusted by it, life goes on.
kali921:
Hi! Yes, I see you are the insensitive jerk that made the icon by your comment!
Who or what the guy was in life doesn't matter to me. I mean, do you know for sure that he was an insurgent?
Regardless, it doesn't matter. I certainly don't think people should go through life in denial of the horrors of war. But non-combatants should be given a choice as to whether or not they get to look at gruesome content on the internet. LJ, after all, is a service for those as young as thirteen years old, but its TOS. Do you really think it's a good idea to shove that into their faces because of your self-righteous crusade to show what happens to people that shoot on what you think is the wrong side of the war?
You and the OP didn't give people a choice. You shoved an image of a man with his head exploded all over the sidewalk in our faces in a public community, where thirteen and fourteen year olds might see it, or those that simply don't want to look at it.
Your comment also blows the OP's idiotic "well, it's a comment on the brutality of the Bush administration" excuse right out of the water, because here you're telling me that it's okay to do the icon, because, gasp, he was an enemy.
Your stance is, at best, in extremely poor taste.
In other words, you lack judgement.
stagger_lee77:
actually, yes, yes i do know he was an insurgent. he fired a small arms weapon on an american tracked vehicle. in running up to the vehicle, he was crushed by the vehicle. if am american did that and was run over by an iraqi T-52, it would still be stupid. that's like bringing a knife to a gun fight. thus, the "no brainer" quip.
but since you didn't read the rest of my comment before you decided on an ad hominem attack on me based on the fact that i created said icon... you didn't see the part where i stated that i don't use it in public communities. i use it all the time in my LJ, but i make it a point not to use it in comms because it does have a certain squick factor to it. what the OP did with my icon after she snagged it from me is her business. i understand your point about 13 and 14 year old seeing it, but i can only back you on that view when it comes to public communities. if that same minor stumbles across it on my personal LJ, that's not my problem. no 13 year old should be reading my journal anyway.
kali921:
What part of me stating that I didn't care how he died for the purposes of this discussion did you not understand? People are driven by passion and emotionalism to do things that you might deem stupid all of the time. It's sad that you're so desensitized, perhaps to the point of totally lacking empathy. But don't play the "what I've been through" card here for excusing your lack of foresight, dear. There are plenty of people here that have been through what you have, and likely very much worse.
Mocking those that die in a pretty gruesome fashion in war. Way to go, you, way to be a good, humane person.
The "no brainer" quip has nothing to do with the fact that his brains were spread all over the pavement? You seriously stretch credibility here to the point of non-existence.
If you think that icon only has a "certain" squick factor, I'd hate to see what you think has real squick factor to it.
As for the righteous proclamation that no thirteen year old should be reading your LJ, perhaps, to be prudent and considerate, put that in your user info rather than here? Young people are all over LJ, randomly clicking through everywhere, places where they probably shouldn't be, probably lacking a responsible adult monitoring their internet surfing experience.
I never said you shouldn't use that icon on your own LJ. My comments pertain to the wisdom of posting it here in a public community.
Still, at best, the content in your beloved icon is in poor taste. Objectionable, even.
stagger_lee77:
oh wow. you actually went through and read my user info?
did you bother to read the first thing that's linked there? there's a reason why it's linked to my user page--it is my disclaimer. if you didn't, maybe you should go back and read it. in fact, i implore you to go back and read it. i've never claimed to be good or humane.
i think your issue of it being posted in a public community is reasonable. but, uh... i have now told you twice that i haven't used it in a public community. therefore, your issue isn't with me.
oh well, i'm gonna run. i'm off to go tell a group of kids that bambi's mother dies by the end of the movie.
They're calling for
