Quote: SmokeyTA "I am perfectly tolerant of your opinion and your right to have it. I do however reserve the right to judge you on it. Your definition of bigotry and your use of it here is simply a pointless nonsensical rabbit hole where the word loses any meaning at all.
If you call me a bigot for being intolerant of what i see to be bigoted views, then you yourself are a bigot because you are being intolerant of what you want to define as bigoted views. You are hiding behind an utterly nonsensical and circular argument where anyone at any time expressing any opinion which doesnt accept the opposite as equally true is bigoted.
If you cant tell the difference between someone calling Shaun Wane an ape, and some using what is undoubtedly the loaded imagery of comparing an ape to a black man tells us you are being willfully ignorant of the history of that imagery. We know it is willful because you chose that imagery. You deliberately chose that comparison because you know that to refer to a black man as an ape is offensive. You know the history of its use as a racial insult. Thats why you chose it. If you didnt know it, you wouldnt have chosen to compare Shaun Wane being called an ape, to a black man being called an ape. You know all this yet you STILL chose to ignore that imagery and that history and the offense it causes. You want to pretend that Wane being called it is the same because you being right and you being able to say whatever comes in to your head is more important than you offending other people. And that is your right. You are free to think that way. But that will influence peoples opinion of you. It may lead them to believe you to be and describe you as things you dont want to be thought of, or described as.'"
To call
anyone an ape is an insult. I don't believe for a second that you don't recognise that. However. coming from a man who can't see the relevance of having a black partner in a debate about racism I suppose I shouldn't be surprised should you not.
As for the definition of a bigot I was referring to your attitude that it's alright to insult people based on their socio-economic standing. May I respectfully suggest you read up on the persecution of the Jews if you're struggling to get to grips with that particular concept.
By the way, I like the way that you think definitions are only relevant when they support your own viewpoint. The definitions of ignorant and bigot are as above. You sir, are ignorant and a bigot. It isn't rendered meaningless just because you don't like it! To be fair I did laugh reading your ridiculous attempts to argue otherwise; "pointless nonsensical rabbit hole where the word loses any meaning at all" is pure comedy gold. It has plenty meaning, thank you. You just don't like the fact that it quite plainly applies to you! Well I'm sorry for that. Maybe next time you'll heed your own advice and give thought to the words you use when next throwing insults around.
Incidentally, I chose the imagery of an ape in a suit because it was posted on your own board just last week, yet you chose not to respond when it was. Again, your feeble attempts to justify why you didn't is laughable and says more about you than I ever could.
The bottom line is this. I don't agree with your viewpoint and you don't agree with mine. That's fine; it's a free society. However, if you're going to argue your point I'd appreciate it if you'd at least be consistent as it's very difficult to debate a point with someone who thinks the meaning of words is important except when it applies to themselves, that it's wrong to insult certain people but others are fair game(!) and who rises in indignation over the explanation of the origins of a phrase on the Wigan board but fails to do so when someone posts a picture of a gorilla in a suit on the Leeds one. Just remind me; who do you support again?
