I’ve never met Cherts or Bazza, but from reading the exchange last night, they need to stand in a corner and have a quiet word with themselves.
I can assure you I wasn’t trolling on this issue, why would I? People use as trolling as a defence to issue their insults, I’m no racist, far from it, I dislike people who are racist, sexist and homophobic and by default people who defend them or appear to, if I am wrong in that assertion then I apologise hugely.
If I was incorrect then that would make me and Cherts agree on this in vilyfying people, cultures, races who are? Why didn’t he say that?
Im still waiting to find out when i can fertilise the masses with impunity? This point seems to have been forgotten in amongst the bickering.
3 Likes
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
I can assure you I wasn’t trolling on this issue, why would I? People use as trolling as a defence to issue their insults, I’m no racist, far from it, I dislike people who are racist, sexist and homophobic and by default people who defend them or appear to, if I am wrong in that assertion then I apologise hugely.
If I was incorrect then that would make me and Cherts agree on this in vilyfying people, cultures, races who are? Why didn’t he say that?
Maybe Chertsey objects to the idea that UK musloids are en masse racist, sexist and homophobic. That seems to be the Bone Of Contention.
1 Like
Thats true but an adherent of the faith will by default be sexist, thats my point, your subscribing to sexism for following a custom, it happens in all faiths and cutures of course but that doesn’t excuse it from not being talked about.
Originally posted by @saintbletch
Barry is making nuanced points in this thread that have a right to be heard and debated. It can be seen that on a number of occasions, he tries to steer the thread away from ethnicity and religion to instead debate culture. Others are bringing baggage to the thread and making assumptions about Barry’s motivation. Perhaps they are right about his motivation. Perhaps they are not. I do not know. But there is no content in this thread that I can see that warrants the extreme reaction that Barry has received.
These are my views formed through my eyes with all the baggage I have to help me form those views. I may be wrong.
Several people have debated with Barry during the two weeks the thread has been running. They eventually stopped debating - presumably feeling they had made their point, won the argument, lost the argument or were wasting their time.
On reflection, this seems like a sound approach to me.
Of all your points Bletch I would like to pick up on this one, I agree with the rest too BTW.
I see this in Barry’s posts, I don’t see him as racist, I see him as preceiving injustices and wanting to speak out about them. What Barry does do wrong is not express it very well.
I am guessing that Barry is an articulate and intelligent man but some of his responses, i.e. Whooper, Tory bastard etc. don’t promote sensible debate. Cherts’ responses weren’t all that great either BTW
I have stepped away from this thread but noticed it ballooned last night and my interest was piqued! I haven’t read the last 5 pages but I’m sort of glad I didn’t, throwing insults back and forth between each other is the domain of pre-pubescent teeenagers and they are both better than that!
1 Like
Following Barry’s comments on the Bournemouth match thread I, and I suspect many others will never bother to debate with him or take him seriously again.
And while he’s wandering around the ring smugly celebrating his victory this morning, perhaps he could think about trying to salvage some of his lost street cred?
If he is going to apologise to anyone it should be to OUR team that he described as inbred cunts, and the manager who is also a cunt, and JayRod who is finished.
I don’t want blind happy-clapping from Saints fans, but the wholesale extreme abuse of the club during a 3-1 away win was ridiculous, tells us much about the author - and does the forum no favours.
2 Likes
I wholeheartedly agree.
I can assure you I am not walking around smuggly, I am not like that at all, not in the slighest.
Yeah right.
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
an adherent of the faith will by default be sexist, thats my point
yeah that’s the bit I don’t agree with. Faulty Reasoning imo.
1 Like
If the doctrine is sexist and racist an adherent of that doctrine becomes sexist or racist by default, thyemay not even have those views but by following that faith (many of them) they are. Thats my point, religions and cultures are inherently racist and sexist, some are more more forward thinking that others due to time, histoircal movements and revolutions.
Shall I take that as a no to the apology suggestion?
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
If the doctrine is sexist and racist an adherent of that doctrine becomes sexist or racist by default
That’s saying the same thing again B, and I still think it is Faulty Reasoning.
I’m adherent Saints FC, but that don’t make me adherent to the policy of selling best players, employing Puel as manager, or liking the private practices of our disgusting musloid players like Boufal.
FFS Barry, why not just give it a rest for a few days eh? No matter what you say you think you are, you come across as a racist, as an Islamophobe and a zenophobe. I find your views on Muslims distatsteful but decided to bow out of this thread because I could see myself going down the same route that I did on TSW with Hypo and Fry. I dont know if you thought you were being funny regading your outburst about Puel and the club but frankly you made Alpine sound like the voice of reason. I am all for freedom of speech, but there does come a point when someone should just shut the fuck up. You my friend, have long reached that point. Its Christmas. Give as all an early present and leave it for a bit eh?
sog pls, i’m trying to stir things up here
9 Likes
Barry, I honestly don’t really want to engage with you on this issue as I think you’re completely wrongheaded and impossible to persuade, but I just can’t help myself!
Can you clarify for me whether you’re saying that all Muslims are sexist, racist, and homophobic? It seems to be what you’re saying. If so, why aren’t all Anglicans sexist, racist, and homophobic? Their religious texts say pretty much the same thing (I’m thinking particularly about homosexuality here, but it applies, I think, to sexism too).
If you ARE saying that both Muslims AND Anglicans are racist, sexist, and homophobic then you are plainly wrong, as there are out Muslims and out Anglicans, which means that those particular individuals (and presumably their friends and families if they have healthy, happy relationships) cannot be homophobic, which then defeats your point that ALL Muslims nad Anglicans are homophobic.
Surely what’s actually the case is that religious texts are religious texts - that’s a given. But how people interpret those religious texts is a very individual thing - some will be literal, some will not, just as some religious demoninations are literal (and thus can be racist, sexist, or homophobic) and some are more loosely interpretive (and thus accepting of differences that historically would be frowned upon and shunned).
5 Likes
Are you confusing doctrine with dogma Barry? My understanding is that doctrine is the guidance and teaching part, dogma is the mandatory stuff. Therefore the doctrine can be adhered to or not depending on the persons interpretation, giving them a choice as to whether or not to get involved with the racist/sexist aspects etc etc.
1 Like
Thanks for typing that out as it has saved me a job.
4 Likes
Barry has two main problems:
-
The world is black and white to Barry, there are no grey areas. Hence “all Muslims are homophobic” and “Claude Puel is utterly useless”.
-
Barry thinks that if he thinks something then everyone else should too, he is not wrong because he has ‘reasoned’ to himself that he is always correct. Thus any contrary points put to him are simply swerved, wilfully misinterpreted, or twisted to fit his ‘correct’ view.
These two problems mean that he is inherently impossible to debate with because he sees himself as infallible in terms of his own reasoning. It’s pointless. The Bournemouth matchday thread properly showed him up for what he really is because once we won and reality didn’t match his perception, he just sauntered to another thread and ignored the existence of the reality that had appeared before him.
When Saints lose again, or put in a poor performance, Barry will reappear to say “I told you so” because that reality matches his internal one. And that’s why Barry is thriving in this shotstorm World of Terror - there’s no end of ‘evidence’ to match his created worldview.
6 Likes