parmalee gives James R some feedback

[parmalee]

Moderator note: This thread was split from the following thread:

Ms Rowling: insightful critic of gender policy or myopic [insult]

There you go. Have at it. I will start with a middle position, along the Noam Chomsky lines of: we should be able to have a calm chat about these matters, and no one should have their free speech rights constrained as we find our way on such complex matters of human identity. Nor should...

www.sciforums.com

(Oh, and parmalee: your wish has been granted. Enjoy.)
---

Prediction:

JamesR will move the preceding several posts to the Cesspool and give them a "clever" little title like this:

"Sarkus and Parmalee make wild accusations against the esteemed moderator, JamesR"

Basis for this prediction? Patterns of behavior observed over the past 15 years, and a history of doing precisely this--usually including insults directed at members here--countless times in the past.

 

[DaveC426913]

Prediction:

JamesR will move the preceding several posts to the Cesspool and give them a "clever" little title like this:

"Sarkus and Parmalee make wild accusations against the esteemed moderator, JamesR"

Basis for this prediction? Patterns of behavior observed over the past 15 years, and a history of doing precisely this--usually including insults directed at members here--countless times in the past.

This would be a self-fulfilling prediction. It is pretty apparent you are trying your best to make it happen, calling him "fucking stupid", a "lying, bigoted troll" and a "prick", just to reference a few recent posts.

No points for predicting something you are doing your best to instigate yourself.

 

[DaveC426913]

With respect to transphobia only, is there anyone here--other than yourself--who does not regard JKR's views as transphobic? From what I can see, the following persons have indicated that they consider JKR's views transphobic ( and I may be overlooking a few, as this is from a cursory review of just the past few pages): myself, Billvon, Tiassa, Sarkus, Pinball, Dave, TheVat. Which parties are "hysterical" here, and which are not?

I do not belong on this list. I have not explicitly indicated I find her views transphobic. I have some issues with them, but I have not signed up for a Rowling-Haters membership card, thanks.

 

[parmalee]

This would be a self-fulfilling prediction. It is pretty apparent you are trying your best to make it happen, calling him "fucking stupid", a "lying, bigoted troll" and a "prick", just to reference a few recent posts.

No points for predicting something you are doing your best to instigate yourself.

Did you miss this?

Foghorn has stated or implied that Jews are "happy" to portray Jewish stereotypes...

Where? And are they?

James appears to be asking, "Are Jews happy to portray Jewish stereotypes?" Yes?

Also, is asked if he was "that fucking stupid". According to James, the question mark erases the possibility for insinuation, apparently.

 

[parmalee]

I do not belong on this list. I have not explicitly indicated I find her views transphobic. I have some issues with them, but I have not signed up for a Rowling-Haters membership card, thanks.

You did say this, however:

She does not make a compelling argument. It is certainly her personal journey, but it doesn't make many good points that might apply on a more objective scale.

One example:
- the sole requirement for someone to demand they be considered a female is that they decide they identify as female.
- gendered washrooms allow anyone in who identifies as female
- this provides a loophole where men (specifically abusers, predators) have access to women's washrooms.
She wants to close this loophole.
...
It's a terrible red herring argument that (not to put too fine a point on it) is a ploy almost universally used by bigots.

(Emphasis added.)

 

[DaveC426913]

You did say this, however:

(Emphasis added.)

Yes. I get angry. Psychopaths get angry. It does not follow though, that I am asserting I am a psychopath.

 

[Sarkus]

With respect to transphobia only, is there anyone here--other than yourself--who does not regard JKR's views as transphobic? From what I can see, the following persons have indicated that they consider JKR's views transphobic ( and I may be overlooking a few, as this is from a cursory review of just the past few pages): myself, Billvon, Tiassa, Sarkus, Pinball, Dave, TheVat. Which parties are "hysterical" here, and which are not?

Hmm. Not sure I've commented on whether I consider her views transphobic or not. I've actively tried to avoid doing so as I'm pretty ignorant on the whole matter. Yeah, cowardly of me, but honest.
I really only chipped in with regard the antisemitism and Potter.

 

[parmalee]

Yes. I get angry. Psychopaths get angry. It does not follow though, that I am asserting I am a psychopath.

???

It's a terrible red herring argument that (not to put too fine a point on it) is a ploy almost universally used by bigots.

(Emphasis added again.)

Also, I said this:

From what I can see, the following persons have indicated that they consider JKR's views transphobic...

I said absolutely nothing about this:

I have not signed up for a Rowling-Haters membership card

 

[DaveC426913]

Did you miss this?

James appears to be asking, "Are Jews happy to portray Jewish stereotypes?" Yes?

Also, is asked if he was "that fucking stupid". According to James, the question mark erases the possibility for insinuation, apparently.

How does any of this address my point that you are predicting an action that you are violently attempting to instigate yourself?

It's mot just an academic point. This thread is not your personal private fight with James. You have an obligation to keep a civil tongue in your head for the sake of others who are trying to participate. If you can't, consider maybe your involvement in this thread is less about the thread topic and more about your personal axe to grind. Fer cryin' out loud.

 

[DaveC426913]

???

(Emphasis added again.)

Follow my analogy:

I do X. Psychopaths also do X. It does not follow that I am a psychopath. Agree?

JKR does X. Bigots do X. It does not follow that JKR is a bigot.

And maybe be a little more forgiving of other peoples' comprehension, before accusing others of "can't you fucking read"...

Also, I said this:
"From what I can see, the following persons have indicated that they consider JKR's views transphobic..."

Well I haven't, so I am removing myself from your list.

 

[parmalee]

How does any of this address my point that you are predicting an action that you are violently attempting to instigate yourself?

It's more that I was backing up the assertion re: "lying bigoted troll". The lying and trolling are evident by virtue of having routinely misrepresented my own statements, as well as those made by several other posters. That question certainly suggest bigotry to me. Also, it was just one example. I've provided others elsewhere. Though really my contention is more that James provides cover for bigotry.

It's mot just an academic point. This thread is not your personal private fight with James. You have an obligation to keep a civil tongue in your head for the sake of others who are trying to participate. If you can't, consider maybe you involvement in this thread is less about the thread topic and more about your personal axe to grind. Fer cryin' out loud.

99 percent of the time, I am entirely in agreement with you here. However, in this case, James has been trolling throughout most of this thread and I'm just sick and tired of it.

 

[parmalee]

Follow my analogy:

I do X. Psychopaths also do X. It does not follow that I am a psychopath. Agree?

JKR does X. Bigots do X. It does not follow that JKR is a bigot.

And maybe be a little more forgiving of other peoples' comprehension, before accusing others of "can't you fucking read"...



Well I haven't, so I am removing myself from your list.

Again, I said:

they consider JKR's views transphobic

There is a distinction.

Edit: Also note the "indicated" part--I was drawing an inference from what you had said.

 

[DaveC426913]

.... by virtue of having routinely misrepresented my own statements, as well as those made by several other posters.

You mean like you just did? At least two people have had to come out and correct your list.

You commit the very crime you cast filth at James for.

99 percent of the time, I am entirely in agreement with you here. However, in this case, James has been trolling throughout most of this thread and I'm just sick and tired of it.

It's called disagreeing, or having a different viewpoint. I have a different one too.

As for trolling, I strongly suspect that what you are sensing is James' loss of patience with such things as the hypocrisy, noted immediately above and below.

Look, if you try this hard to drag this to an arena of dirty fighting, you can't then accuse your opponent of fighting dirty.

Edit: Also note the "indicated" part--I was drawing an inference from what you had said.

And in doing so, you ... "misrepresented my own statements, as well as those made by several other posters. "

But that's a pretty far cry from being a "lying, bigoted, fucking stupid prick".

 

[parmalee]

You mean like you just did? At least two people who have had to come out and correct your list.

And you misrepresented me--nowhere did I say anything about "hating JKR". In fact, I quite clearly stated that the persons named have indicated that they find JKR's views transphobic (or bigoted in that sense)--nothing about JKR herself.

Moreover, James has repeatedly misrepresented several posters within this thread. Read the thread. Has anyone said that JKR is an antisemite? How many times have I, and others, had to clarify--to James--that the matter being discussed is the presence of antisemtic tropes within the work, not whether or not Rowling is an antisemite. And so on and so on--again: Read the thread.

As for trolling, perhaps what you are sensing is James' loss of patience with such things as the hypocrisy, noted immediately above.

???

Do you seriously not see the innumerable places wherein James has made baseless insinuations against me, Sarkus, Tiassa, and Billvon? And argued against straw men of his own design again and again?

 

[DaveC426913]

And you misrepresented me--nowhere did I say anything about "hating JKR".

Where did I claim you did? Are you misrepresenting me?

In fact, I quite clearly stated that the persons named have indicated that they find JKR's views transphobic (or bigoted in that sense)--nothing about JKR herself.

Thus, misrepresenting me. Something you accuse James of doing. So which is it? OK, or not OK?

Moreover, James has repeatedly misrepresented several posters within this thread. Read the thread.

I'm having to deal with your behaviour, here, now.

You can't justify your deliberate attempt to get infracted and then fobbed off to the Cesspool by saying "well, he started it!"

If you are so emotional that you can't participate without torpedoing the thread, that might be a good indication to step back and reexamine your motives.

Do you seriously not see the innumerable places wherein James has made baseless insinuations against me, Sarkus, Tiassa, and Billvon? And argued against straw men of his own design again and again?

I don't see where he's called you a prick and a fucking idiot.

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[parmalee]

And in doing so, you ... "misrepresented my own statements, as well as those made by several other posters. "

But that's a pretty far cry from being a "lying, bigoted, fucking stupid prick".

You may have noticed that somewhere above I described James as one of the more dishonest posters I've ever encountered. That was not an exaggeration, and it's based upon seeing his dishonesty and misrepresentation again and again over 15 years. Also note that I am civil with pretty much everyone, unless they are dishonest and bigoted (see foghorn, for instance, or Trek). I've lost patience with James and will accord him the same respect he accords other posters--in my own way (that is to say, I have no patience for dishonest, bigoted, and/or bad faith actors).

 

[parmalee]

If you are so emotional that you can't participate without torpedoing the thread, that might be a good indication to step back and reexamine your motives.

Find an example of me not being civil towards anyone in this thread other than James or Foghorn.

I'm civil towards people who generally post in good faith.

Edit: Anyway, I'm getting the impression that you haven't actually read through this thread (note: I'm saying it's my impress; I honestly don't know whether you have or haven't). I'm hardly the one who is "torpedoing" this thread. I think that would be readily apparent on a more thorough reading.

 

[TheVat]

From what I can see, the following persons have indicated that they consider JKR's views transphobic...TheVat.

I have not. I've said she seems clueless at times on the subjective nature of trans experience. I don't think she is opposed to trans rights or freedom from discrimination.

On the meta discussion: folks here seem to spend undue time nursing old wounds or trying to nail buzzwords onto their foes. I'd rather consult a dictionary and use a formal precise definition for terms like anti-Semitism or transphobia or (good grief) supremacism, and I don't think anyone here fits those terms. Good faith discussion should depend on honoring agreed definitions of words.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. Some of these personal feuds, running a decade or more apparently, seem to qualify. I will avoid threads, starting with this one, where these feuds take over and it's demanded that we comb over what everyone said and what they may have said going back fifteen years. Don't. Give. One. Tiny. Shit.

 

[DaveC426913]

Find an example of me not being civil towards anyone in this thread pother than James or Foghorn.

It doesn't really matter to others who, exactly, you talk like that to or about. It drags the thread into a place of shit-flinging, regardless.

You. I mean, you in the shit, dragging it to your personal comfort zone.

 

[DaveC426913]

I have not.

OK, so that's three out of seven who desire not to be misrepresented. And that's only the vocal ones who have spoken out, and only so far.


So yeah, I request that everything from the post 524 prediction onward get moved out as a diversion - a self-fulfilling meta-rant.