826
Is this vandalism?
(lemmy.ca)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2025
826 points (100.0% liked)
Cyberstuck
102 readers
205 users here now
A place to post your Cybertruck fails!
No doxxing and all the basic rules of a sub
founded 4 days ago
MODERATORS
When's the last time you explicitly called a woman a cocksucker? It's used as a homophobic jab like 99% of the time.
Y'all attacking Nazis by implying they suck cock, with the implication that that's shameful (and not just because the cock is attached to a Nazi, give me a break).
Honestly though, the most insulting part of your comment is calling me a fucking liberal. Ew
How am I acting like a liberal? You shouldn't use words you don't understand the meaning of
I'm calling you a liberal as in a radlib sjw type liberal. I thought that was really obvious because it's how you're acting. I'm not calling you a capital L Liberal. Yes, words can more than one meaning and can also be offensive or not offensive given the context. But I guess it's obvious you don't understand the meaning of words or any nuance to how they are used. I mean that's kind of how this whole conversation started.
All I'm saying is that if the Nazi part is the insulting part, just say that directly
... Unless you'd be cool with a bumper sticker on your car that just says "I suck cock", since as you've already established it isn't an insult
edit: conciseness in terminology
At the end of the day you're criticizing something that is meant to insult a Nazi. If you can understand the difference between a homophobic person puting a "I suck cock" sticker on a car and (let's say) a gay man putting a "Nazi Cocksucker" sticker on someone's car. You can also understand the nuance of any type of person puting the OPs sticker on someone's car. There is nuance and context that you are trying to remove to (1) criticize a sticker meant to insult a Nazi and (2) the use of cocksucker as an insult.
You're removing any of that context to hyper focus on something and pretend that nuance and context doesn't exist. Which is very very radlib of you.
The only person that you're defending in this situation that should actually be offended is a female or gay Nazi. So you're literally just defending the feelings of a Nazi. Unless you want to remove all context and nuance. Which is what you tried to do.
You are the one trying to remove nuance by implying any way you can insult a Nazi is legitimate. How about we call them low IQ genetically inferior race traitors too? That will really show them
Thanks for ignoring everything I said and responding with a straw man. Good job.
"Nuh uh. You are! And here's a totally different thing that removes all nuance so I can ignore what you just said!"
That's literally how you just replied. I guess you have no interest in actually discussing this because you've gone full circle into stupidity now.
Ooh we're doing name-calling now. I threw in my opinion that disagrees with the notion that "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets" and took issue with one of the jabs in a 2-for-1 bumper sticker and not only did you feel the need to justify it purely over the target of the sticker (a cybertruck owner), but also to go on a screed about the got-dang SJWs ruining everything with their complaints about everything being problematic. You needed to put me in the "liberal sjw" box so you could avoid engaging with my arguments, and then feign surprise when I don't argue back in completely good faith. Jesus fucking Christ.
Well it's bigoted for a gay person to call someone a cocksucker as an insult as well. Reclaiming a slur/targeted insult doesn't include using it for harm. Internalized homophobia is a thing and it's not a "librul ess-jay-dubyuh" thing but actually a pretty well documented social phenomenon.
Amazing. You wrote a wall of text without ever addressing what I said. It's obvious you don't want to actually have a conversation so now you are just rambling.
If you actually read it you'd notice I did in fact address what you said in there. This back and forth is getting so pedantic it's actually just amusing to keep up at this point.
You realize arguing against your own strawman is not addressing my argument right? I guess you just convinced yourself that I actually said "any type of insult is acceptable". I never said that. YOU said that. Everything you've said since then has been pointless rambling and arguing against something I never said.
Then what are you saying?