I called a trans boy a girl by mistake... and it may cost me my job as a teacher: Maths tutor suspended after praising pupil using the wrong gender

First topic message reminder :

A teacher has been suspended and could face the sack after he ‘accidentally’ called a transgender pupil a ‘girl’ in class when the student identifies as a boy.
Joshua Sutcliffe, 27, who teaches maths at a state secondary school in Oxfordshire, said ‘Well done girls’ to the teenager and a friend when he spotted them working hard. 
He apologised when corrected by the pupil, but six weeks later he was suspended from teaching after the pupil’s mother lodged a complaint.
Following an investigation, he has been summoned to a formal disciplinary hearing this week to face misconduct charges for ‘misgendering’.


According to documents seen by The Mail on Sunday, he also faces claims that he is breaching equality policies by referring to the pupil by name rather than as ‘he’ or ‘him’.
The £30,000-a-year teacher said he was ‘distraught’ and had been reduced to tears as teaching was his life, and he branded the actions of the school as ‘political correctness gone mad’.
Mr Sutcliffe, a maths graduate who gained his teaching qualifications at Exeter University, said he had no official instructions about how to address the student, but along with other staff decided to use the pupil’s chosen first name. 
However, he has admitted that, as a Christian, he avoided using male pronouns such as ‘he’ and ‘him’.
He believed this was consistent with the school’s code of conduct and equality policies to show respect and tolerance, and he said he had encountered no problems with this.

He was told to come to the school and sit in the staff room preparing work, but he was not allowed to discuss the situation with colleagues. He said he thought no more about the incident until the week before last when, after a parents’ evening, he was unexpectedly called to the head’s office to be told there had been a ‘transgender complaint’ against him and that he was suspended from teaching while it was investigated.
He later discovered that the pupil’s family had claimed he had not only ‘misgendered’ the pupil but had unfairly given the pupil a disproportionate number of detentions for poor behaviour, though this later claim was not upheld during the investigation.
It is understood that the family’s main concern was that Mr Sutcliffe was picking on their child and they would not have complained about misgendering on its own as they are supporters of free speech.


Mr Sutcliffe said: ‘I was absolutely shocked to be told by the head that I was under investigation. I didn’t know what was happening. It was surreal, Kafkaesque. 


'I said it was only one incident for which I had apologised, but he insisted the investigation would go ahead.
‘I had always tried to respect the pupil and keep a professional attitude as well as my integrity, but it seemed to me that the school was trying to force me to adhere to its liberal, Leftish agenda.’


Mr Sutcliffe assumed the investigation would be brief and he would soon be back in the classroom, but he was questioned for an hour on the day after the meeting with the head and again last Monday, and was then sent a letter telling him to attend a formal disciplinary hearing this Wednesday, attended by the head and three governors.


He said: ‘I have never been trained to deal with this sort of thing. I felt completely out of my depth and intimidated.’



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5073511/Teacher-suspended-praising-pupil-using-wrong-gender.html

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:"unsubconciously racist"

There you go again. Every single week you call someone a racist.

You're like a verbal Groundhog Day. Bored now.

You may disagree, but you have no comprehension that you are

Look back at my points

I will ask again

What does it take to be Scottish Eddie?

There is only one right answer

well...actually to be a "real" scotsman....you would have to belong to one of the clans...however tennuously (which I guess gives me dual nationality ....oooo eck)

anything else aint the genuine article....cept of course under (english imposed) law

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


You may disagree, but you have no comprehension that you are

Look back at my points

I will ask again

What does it take to be Scottish Eddie?

There is only one right answer

well...actually to be a "real" scotsman....you would have to belong to one of the clans...however tennuously (which I guess gives me dual nationality ....oooo eck)

anything else aint the genuine article....cept of course under (english imposed) law

You would have to belong?

So no blacks allowed then or Asians?

A real scotsman?

A person that came from actually ireland?

Please explain to me what a real scotsman is?

As you sound as racist as smelly?

stop twatting about didge

your points are irrelevent

your arguments are shit

you've said at least 3 people sound racist

stop being such a boring, irritating wanker

gelico wrote:

stop twatting about didge

your points are irrelevent

your arguments are shit

you've said at least 3 people sound racist

stop being such a boring, irritating wanker

Alright gelico

Show why?

I am all ears

I am a boring wanker, thank you, but that is not a valid argument

Calling em every name under the sun and the fact I respect you holds no water

You cannot do as the left do and silence me, can you?

oh god not that again.

some scots came (way back historically) from ireland mainly to the west coast the rest are a historical mixture of picts and some later invaders, but settled down into the old clan structure and became one people once THAT became established...

historically if you aint got a clan you aint scots....no really... the fact that anyone living in scotland is a scotsman nowadays ISNT (old) scots law....its IMPOSED english law.....

just the same as the law in wales ISNT (the far more just) old welsh law..its IMPOSED english law.

Lord Foul wrote:oh god not that again.

some scots came (way back historically) from ireland mainly to the west coast the rest are a historical mixture of picts and some later invaders, but settled down into the old clan structure and became one people once THAT became established...

historically if you aint got a clan you aint scots....no really... the fact that anyone living in scotland is a scotsman nowadays ISNT (old) scots law....its IMPOSED english law.....

just the same as the law in wales ISNT (the far more just) old welsh law..its IMPOSED english law.

No, the name Scots derives from ireland and they ethinically cleansed the Picts

So what you are saying is effectivelly racist

No person can represent scotland unless white and part of a clan

And you want to base this on old English racist laws?

Come again?

You really are a racist peice of trash

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


You may disagree, but you have no comprehension that you are

Look back at my points

I will ask again

What does it take to be Scottish Eddie?

There is only one right answer

well...actually to be a "real" scotsman....you would have to belong to one of the clans...however tennuously (which I guess gives me dual nationality ....oooo eck)

anything else aint the genuine article....cept of course under (english imposed) law

Does anyone want to show and prove why Lord Foul is a suckup?

I mean there is a no such thing as a real Scotsman, unless you have the mindset of a racist imbicille

You can have any nationality you want, as its made up, but to claim a real Scotsman? And i though smelly was racist. As there is no such thing as a real Scotsman or Englishmen

You just wanted to defend eddie, being an idiot

That was noble, she was still stupid

Now can anyone challenge me, or am I only left to insult on this?

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:oh god not that again.

some scots came (way back historically) from ireland mainly to the west coast the rest are a historical mixture of picts and some later invaders, but settled down into the old clan structure and became one people once THAT became established...

historically if you aint got a clan you aint scots....no really... the fact that anyone living in scotland is a scotsman nowadays ISNT (old) scots law....its IMPOSED english law.....

just the same as the law in wales ISNT (the far more just) old welsh law..its IMPOSED english law.

No, the name Scots derives from ireland and they ethinically cleansed the Picts

So what you are saying is effectivelly racist

No person can represent scotland unless white and part of a clan

And you want to base this on old English racist laws?

Come again?

You really are a racist peice of trash

you know what didge ...you're a fookin eejit.....you dont even know HOW to debate....you just want to TELL everyone how YOU think it is (or should be) and think you know everything about anything....

you are EVEN stupid enough to assume that the above is MY PERSONAL pov on the subject, rather than a perspective of how things were (and of course potentially how they would be NOW...if it wasnt for that racist english law.

how does stating the fact that historically (which i would have thought was obvious to even a child reading my post) you couldnt be a "real" scotsman unless you had a clan make ME a racist????

after all you asked "what does it take to be a scotsman" ...I gave you an historical perspective ...I didnt say I agreed with it...

what you also dont see is that after a year of working as a serf in a clan...you could become a clan member (and thus a scotsman true) IF one of the clan families accepted you and agreed to you joining them (effectively declaring you a "stepson" and under old scots law a stepson was full part of the family..a state NOT recognised in ENGLISH LAW for many many years later.)

very similar to old Welsh law, but there all that was required was the years service and the good will of your current master, (you were only tied for 1 year and after you could leave upon giving half your worth to your old master.... but then you were considered welsh and could go find work etc anywhere....far more just than the norman (english)laws (and considering the times giving back that half wasnt so unjust since upon taking you in your master had to ensure you were clothed, housed and fed...even if you were sick or injured.

did you know under old welsh law a man that stole to eat wasnt punished....his master was, and if he was a masterless man a master would be found for him, failing that he got recruited into Owains court. ONLY theft for greed was punished. (and that was accounted a more grivious crime than killing, other than killing by stealth or other foul means. i.e killing in a fair fight was settled by blood price, murder was a capital offence.

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


You may disagree, but you have no comprehension that you are

Look back at my points

I will ask again

What does it take to be Scottish Eddie?

There is only one right answer

well...actually to be a "real" scotsman....you would have to belong to one of the clans...however tennuously (which I guess gives me dual nationality ....oooo eck)

anything else aint the genuine article....cept of course under (english imposed) law

Does anyone want to show and prove why Lord Foul is a suckup?

I mean there is a no such thing as a real Scotsman, unless you have the mindset of a racist imbicille

You can have any nationality you want, as its made up, but to claim a real Scotsman? And i though smelly was racist. As there is no such thing as a real Scotsman or Englishmen

You just wanted to defend eddie, being an idiot

That was noble, she was still stupid

Now can anyone challenge me, or am I only left to insult on this?

you want to be careful...you might not get your head through the door frame tomorrow....its that swollen

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


No, the name Scots derives from ireland and they ethinically cleansed the Picts

So what you are saying is effectivelly racist

No person can represent scotland unless white and part of a clan

And you want to base this on old English racist laws?

Come again?

You really are a racist peice of trash

you know what didge ...you're a fookin eejit.....you dont even know HOW to debate....you just want to TELL everyone how YOU think it is (or should be) and think you know everything about anything....

Didge wrote: Ah when all else fails just insult me?
Score. I prove that you were inherantly racist allow Mugabe to be called a Black dog and you know it

you are EVEN stupid enough to assume that the above is MY PERSONAL pov on the subject, rather than a perspective of how things were (and of course potentially how they would be NOW...if it wasnt for that racist english law.

Didge wrote:Misdirection,
You argued that it was okay that Mugabe could be called a "black" dog and smelly was laughing his arse of

how does stating the fact that historically (which i would have thought was obvious to even a child reading my post) you couldnt be a "real" scotsman unless you had a clan make ME a racist????

Didge wrote: So your view to a real Scot, white correct. Who made you the judicator?
You see its racists people like you that think you can decide wo can be Scottish or not and based on what?
That they came from Ireland?

after all you asked "what does it take to be a scotsman" ...I gave you an historical perspective ...I didnt say I agreed with it...

Didge wrote: Being accepted to a SCOTTISH Nation by any chance? You do understand it is a concept, so who really is Scottish?
William Wallace?
Do you see how pathetic your argument is
Can someone not born there be a Scottish hero as many people have for England?

what you also dont see is that after a year of working as a serf in a clan...you could become a clan member (and thus a scotsman true) IF one of the clan families accepted you and agreed to you joining them (effectively declaring you a "stepson" and under old scots law a stepson was full part of the family..a state NOT recognised in ENGLISH LAW for many many years later.)

Didge wrote:Oh wow, basically slavery
that is nice. You are basically arguing for slavery
So what you are saying that being Scotish is empahtically racist

very similar to old Welsh law, but there all that was required was the years service and the good will of your current master, (you were only tied for 1 year and after you could leave upon giving half your worth to your old master.... but then you were considered welsh and could go find work etc anywhere....far more just than the norman (english)laws  (and considering the times giving back that half wasnt so unjust since upon taking you in your master had to ensure you were clothed, housed and fed...even if you were sick or injured.

Didge wrote: A years service?
And then give more money to your former slave owner?
I could give two rats arse about the time
We are talki ng about how we are a diverse nation
You think that was diversity in the past, then you are an idiot

did you know under old welsh law a man that stole to eat wasnt punished....his master was, and if he was a masterless man a master would be found for him, failing that he got recruited into Owains court. ONLY theft for greed was punished. (and that was accounted a more grivious crime than killing, other than killing by stealth or other foul means. i.e killing in a fair fight was settled by blood price, murder was a capital offence.

Oh my god, he was not punished?

Tell that to the countless welsh, Irish and Scottish that were oppressed under the English, you apolosgist peice of shit. I do not want you to apologise for their crimes, but i will be damned to listen to your complete revisionist horseshit. You insult the memory of my family

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


Does anyone want to show and prove why Lord Foul is a suckup?

I mean there is a no such thing as a real Scotsman, unless you have the mindset of a racist imbicille

You can have any nationality you want, as its made up, but to claim a real Scotsman? And i though smelly was racist. As there is no such thing as a real Scotsman or Englishmen

You just wanted to defend eddie, being an idiot

That was noble, she was still stupid

Now can anyone challenge me, or am I only left to insult on this?

you want to be careful...you might not get your head through the door frame tomorrow....its that swollen

I seriously do not care any more

I gave you an opportunity to be honest

You fucking gave me bullshit

I have no trust in you anymore

I proved you unconciously were racist

You did not even admit you could have been

Now fuck off, I have zero respect for people like you

gelico wrote:

stop twatting about didge

your points are irrelevent

your arguments are shit

you've said at least 3 people sound racist

stop being such a boring, irritating wanker

In a nutshell.

eddie wrote:

gelico wrote:

stop twatting about didge

your points are irrelevent

your arguments are shit

you've said at least 3 people sound racist

stop being such a boring, irritating wanker

In a nutshell.

Okay Eddie

What is wrong with what I said?
Is it wrong that people can call Mugabe a black dog and not Hitler a white dog?

The fact is people are inherantly racist and the sooner i am rid of this world the better

eddie wrote:

gelico wrote:

stop twatting about didge

your points are irrelevent

your arguments are shit

you've said at least 3 people sound racist

stop being such a boring, irritating wanker

In a nutshell.

By the way thank you

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


No, the name Scots derives from ireland and they ethinically cleansed the Picts

So what you are saying is effectivelly racist

No person can represent scotland unless white and part of a clan

And you want to base this on old English racist laws?

Come again?

You really are a racist peice of trash

you know what didge ...you're a fookin eejit.....you dont even know HOW to debate....you just want to TELL everyone how YOU think it is (or should be) and think you know everything about anything....

Didge wrote: Ah when all else fails just insult me?
Score. I prove that you were inherantly racist allow Mugabe to be called a Black dog and you know it

you are EVEN stupid enough to assume that the above is MY PERSONAL pov on the subject, rather than a perspective of how things were (and of course potentially how they would be NOW...if it wasnt for that racist english law.

Didge wrote:Misdirection,
You argued that it was okay that Mugabe could be called a "black" dog and smelly was laughing his arse of

how does stating the fact that historically (which i would have thought was obvious to even a child reading my post) you couldnt be a "real" scotsman unless you had a clan make ME a racist????

Didge wrote: So your view to a real Scot, white correct. Who made you the judicator?
You see its racists people like you that think you can decide wo can be Scottish or not and based on what?
That they came from Ireland?

after all you asked "what does it take to be a scotsman" ...I gave you an historical perspective ...I didnt say I agreed with it...

Didge wrote: Being accepted to a SCOTTISH Nation by any chance? You do understand it is a concept, so who really is Scottish?
William Wallace?
Do you see how pathetic your argument is
Can someone not born there be a Scottish hero as many people have for England?

what you also dont see is that after a year of working as a serf in a clan...you could become a clan member (and thus a scotsman true) IF one of the clan families accepted you and agreed to you joining them (effectively declaring you a "stepson" and under old scots law a stepson was full part of the family..a state NOT recognised in ENGLISH LAW for many many years later.)

Didge wrote:Oh wow, basically slavery
that is nice. You are basically arguing for slavery
So what you are saying that being Scotish is empahtically racist

very similar to old Welsh law, but there all that was required was the years service and the good will of your current master, (you were only tied for 1 year and after you could leave upon giving half your worth to your old master.... but then you were considered welsh and could go find work etc anywhere....far more just than the norman (english)laws  (and considering the times giving back that half wasnt so unjust since upon taking you in your master had to ensure you were clothed, housed and fed...even if you were sick or injured.

Didge wrote: A years service?
And then give more money to your former slave owner?
I could give two rats arse about the time
We are talki ng about how we are a diverse nation
You think that was diversity in the past, then you are an idiot

did you know under old welsh law a man that stole to eat wasnt punished....his master was, and if he was a masterless man a master would be found for him, failing that he got recruited into Owains court. ONLY theft for greed was punished. (and that was accounted a more grivious crime than killing, other than killing by stealth or other foul means. i.e killing in a fair fight was settled by blood price, murder was a capital offence.

Oh my god, he was not punished?

Tell that to the countless welsh, Irish and Scottish that were oppressed under the English, you apolosgist peice of shit. I do not want you to apologise for their crimes, but i will be damned to listen to your complete revisionist horseshit. You insult the memory of my family

why dont you fucking learn to READ and THINK and ABSORB what people are saying you ignorant pillock

what part of under old welsh law (can you see it now????) dont you understand

YOU want to make this all about didges "racist rant" and will wifully ignore anything that doesnt feed that...

now I'm not asking...I'm telling you ....climb down of that fucking soap box and stop with the bull crap and poor me i'm an oppressed minority act....
you seem to forget ONE big thing...that same english law that so oppressed the scots irish and welsh from 1300's onwards ALSO oppressed the vast majority of english too...or havnt you read much of THAT history? I suggest "The Condition of the Working Class in England" by Engels as a relatively recent starting point. then work back

eddie wrote:

gelico wrote:

stop twatting about didge

your points are irrelevent

your arguments are shit

you've said at least 3 people sound racist

stop being such a boring, irritating wanker

In a nutshell.

It's the Friday night/Saturday show, put it on TV and it would have people rolling in the aisles.

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Oh my god, he was not punished?

Tell that to the countless welsh, Irish and Scottish that were oppressed under the English, you apolosgist peice of shit. I do not want you to apologise for their crimes, but i will be damned to listen to your complete revisionist horseshit. You insult the memory of my family

why dont you fucking learn to READ and THINK and ABSORB what people are saying you ignorant pillock

what part of under old welsh law (can you see it now????) dont you understand

YOU want to make this all about didges "racist rant" and will wifully ignore anything that doesnt feed that...

now I'm not asking...I'm telling you ....climb down of that fucking soap box and stop with the bull crap and poor me i'm an oppressed minority act....
you seem to forget ONE big thing...that same english law that so oppressed the scots irish and welsh from 1300's onwards ALSO oppressed the vast majority of english too...or havnt you read much of THAT history?  I suggest "The Condition of the Working Class in England" by Engels as a relatively recent starting point. then work back

I will ask you to answer one point and do not tell me to climb down you arogant twat

I stated on here that calling Mugabe a black dog was racist

You then proceeded to misdirect and now give me crap about welsh law

I could not give a fuck about welsh law

Were you wrong to defend smelly calling Mugabe a black dog?

The moment you allowed the word black to be defined on people, is the moment you became racist

Do you not understand that?

I am not oppressed, nor do i pander to people
I simple ask them to be honest and I was made to feel stupid for asking genuine questions by both you and eddie. Which neither of you can answer

Well fuck the pair of you, it shows you have no honesty

As there is no such thing biologically as being Scottish

It was the point I was trying to make, but eddie being Eddie was being thick and then compliments Gelico insulting me

How about someone actually answer my points, because i think you are all idiots

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

why dont you fucking learn to READ and THINK and ABSORB what people are saying you ignorant pillock

what part of under old welsh law (can you see it now????) dont you understand

YOU want to make this all about didges "racist rant" and will wifully ignore anything that doesnt feed that...

now I'm not asking...I'm telling you ....climb down of that fucking soap box and stop with the bull crap and poor me i'm an oppressed minority act....
you seem to forget ONE big thing...that same english law that so oppressed the scots irish and welsh from 1300's onwards ALSO oppressed the vast majority of english too...or havnt you read much of THAT history?  I suggest "The Condition of the Working Class in England" by Engels as a relatively recent starting point. then work back

How about someone actually answer my points, because i think you are all idiots

because your 'points' are irrelevant and your arguments are shit

already told you that

you seem to be the only one interested in your pointless points

gelico wrote:

Didge wrote:


How about someone actually answer my points, because i think you are all idiots

because your 'points' are irrelevant and your arguments are shit

already told you that

you seem to be the only one interested in your pointless points

Oh no

You think they are irrelavant, and cannot reason why

Wow
I must remenber your views

Gelico said i was wrong

Did she explain why?

No

Was it because she was afraid I was right?

No didge. I came on to discuss a word and guess what? It somehow got twisted into a different topic - as usual - then you called me racist - as usual.

So guess what? It bored the very pants off me so I buggered off and found a whole new shiny object to entertain me.

'...Was it because she was afraid I was right?...'



A minute ago that bit of post read...


'...Was it because she was afraid YOU WERE right?...'



Quick edit there Didge... but why were you referring to yourself as '3rd person' before... my precious...!?

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


No, the name Scots derives from ireland and they ethinically cleansed the Picts

So what you are saying is effectivelly racist

No person can represent scotland unless white and part of a clan

And you want to base this on old English racist laws?

Come again?

You really are a racist peice of trash

you know what didge ...you're a fookin eejit.....you dont even know HOW to debate....you just want to TELL everyone how YOU think it is (or should be) and think you know everything about anything....

Didge wrote: Ah when all else fails just insult me?
Score. I prove that you were inherantly racist allow Mugabe to be called a Black dog and you know it

you PROVED nothing...your utterances are NOT proof .......of anything

you are EVEN stupid enough to assume that the above is MY PERSONAL pov on the subject, rather than a perspective of how things were (and of course potentially how they would be NOW...if it wasnt for that racist english law.

Didge wrote:Misdirection,
You argued that it was okay that Mugabe could be called a "black" dog and smelly was laughing his arse of

how does stating the fact that historically (which i would have thought was obvious to even a child reading my post) you couldnt be a "real" scotsman unless you had a clan make ME a racist????

Didge wrote: So your view to a real Scot, white correct. Who made you the judicator?
You see its racists people like you that think you can decide wo can be Scottish or not and based on what?
That they came from Ireland?

nobody made me a "judicator"...thats how it WAS.... that WAS reality as I said you seem to have assumed, as you always do when it suits you that I agree with waht was or what i have posted as if it was some sort of personal position as oposed to some reality as it was or might be,

after all you asked "what does it take to be a scotsman" ...I gave you an historical perspective ...I didnt say I agreed with it...

Didge wrote: Being accepted to a SCOTTISH Nation by any chance? You do understand it is a concept, so who really is Scottish?
William Wallace?
Do you see how pathetic your argument is
Can someone not born there be a Scottish hero as many people have for England?

being a hero for a country doesnt automatically make you a resident/native...a number of english (and scots) hold a crois de guerre does that make them frenchmen???

what you also dont see is that after a year of working as a serf in a clan...you could become a clan member (and thus a scotsman true) IF one of the clan families accepted you and agreed to you joining them (effectively declaring you a "stepson" and under old scots law a stepson was full part of the family..a state NOT recognised in ENGLISH LAW for many many years later.)

Didge wrote:Oh wow, basically slavery
that is nice. You are basically arguing for slavery
So what you are saying that being Scotish is empahtically racist

did I say that...again thats how it WAS. oh and serfdom was "the way of things back then" if your mind cant cope with the concept perhaps you should give up all that history stuff. That doesnt mean I'm "argueing for slavery" it means I'm stating a historical fact...I'll get your safe space ready

very similar to old Welsh law, but there all that was required was the years service and the good will of your current master, (you were only tied for 1 year and after you could leave upon giving half your worth to your old master.... but then you were considered welsh and could go find work etc anywhere....far more just than the norman (english)laws  (and considering the times giving back that half wasnt so unjust since upon taking you in your master had to ensure you were clothed, housed and fed...even if you were sick or injured.

Didge wrote: A years service?
And then give more money to your former slave owner?
I could give two rats arse about the time
We are talki ng about how we are a diverse nation
You think that was diversity in the past, then you are an idiot

did you know under old welsh law a man that stole to eat wasnt punished....his master was, and if he was a masterless man a master would be found for him, failing that he got recruited into Owains court. ONLY theft for greed was punished. (and that was accounted a more grivious crime than killing, other than killing by stealth or other foul means. i.e killing in a fair fight was settled by blood price, murder was a capital offence.

Oh my god, he was not punished?

Tell that to the countless welsh, Irish and Scottish that were oppressed under the English, you apolosgist peice of shit. I do not want you to apologise for their crimes, but i will be damned to listen to your complete revisionist horseshit. You insult the memory of my family

your problem is you dont want to DEBATE...you think you are entitled (pffft) to "lecture, browbeat and insult" all and sundry who dont fall at your feet in adoration of your omniscience. well you aint omniscient and you are far from the fount of all great knowlege. theres nobody on here can make that claim. myself included......
)

Didge wrote:

gelico wrote:

Didge wrote:


How about someone actually answer my points, because i think you are all idiots

because your 'points' are irrelevant and your arguments are shit

already told you that

you seem to be the only one interested in your pointless points

Oh no

You think they are irrelavant, and cannot reason why

Wow
I must remenber your views

Gelico said i was wrong

Did she explain why?

No

Was it because she was afraid I was right?

Yeah I just fucking bet gelico is going to be afraid all fucking night because you might be right about something only you fucking care about.

You're a fucking idiot.

eddie wrote:No didge.  I came on to discuss a word and guess what? It somehow got twisted into a different topic - as usual - then you called me racist - as usual.

So guess what? It bored the very pants off me so I buggered off and found a whole new shiny object to entertain me.

Its a simple question Eddie

Would you allow someone to call you a white dog?

Would you class that as racist

Nobody calls Hitler as a white Dog or Stalin, but because Mugabe is a criminal, it somehow is okay to call him a "black dog"

I am sure this bores you

It does not for me and the fact you think Gelico's response to my questions was spot on, says everything that is wrong with you

That is my opinion

You accepted hers, why can you not accept mine?

You really are full of shit

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:

Oh no

You think they are irrelavant, and cannot reason why

Wow
I must remenber your views

Gelico said i was wrong

Did she explain why?

No

Was it because she was afraid I was right?

Yeah I just fucking bet gelico is going to be afraid all fucking night because you might be right about something only you fucking care about.

You're a fucking idiot.

ywah I do care about racism

In fact i would hate to be right about it actually

I am idiot in believeing in people like you

erm...is mugabe black...or is my colour vision going awry?
Is smelly suggesting he's a dog because he's black?
or is he calling him a dog becasue of his actions?

would you say its wrong to call a tall person who thumps you a "lanky twat"

cos its the same argument

you are placing a descriptive label onto someone?

and by extension (and agument ad absurdum) if someone in a BMW runs me down would I be wrong in saying I was flattened by a BMW driver (I mean we ALL know about THEM dont we....)

A question for the men on here.  If you met a really attractive woman, dated her and wanted to have sex, but found, to your chagrin, as you peeled off her pink chiffon panties, that she had a big pair of hairy balls and a cock, would you still be attracted to her? 

Would you still think of her as a woman?

Lord Foul wrote:erm...is mugabe black...or is my colour vision going awry?
Is smelly suggesting he's a dog because he's black?
or is he calling him a dog becasue of his actions?

would you say its wrong to call a tall person who thumps you a "lanky twat"

cos its the same argument

you are placing a descriptive label onto someone?

Is Mugabe Black?

Or is he simple an evil human

The label you apply is not a label you would ever apply to many criminals

That is institutional racism

Its you ignoring the label and being selective on what is wrong

Let me get this straight

I do not want to see smelly punished, but it proves you allow racism

I mean what would you say, if someone said the Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu was a Jewish Dog?

Do you nollt understand that the words "black" and "Jewish" make it emphatically racist?

Lord Foul wrote:and by extension (and agument ad absurdum) if someone in a BMW runs me down would I be wrong in saying I was flattened by a BMW driver (I mean we ALL know about THEM dont we....)

Okay, have you ever been Irish or a Jew?

Or a woman?

Or labelled black?

If no to the above, you have no idea what you are talking about.

but...doesnt the same apply to lanky...ok not "racsit in the strict sense but perjorative surely in that use

Lord Foul wrote:but...doesnt the same apply to lanky...ok not "racsit in the strict sense but perjorative surely in that use

So let me get this understand this

You "lanky dog"

What ethnic groups is lanky?

You could not judge a barbie contest

smelly-bandit wrote:Unsubconciously

Is that even a word??

Where is Jules? See loves to pick people up for bad English

It's either consciously, or subconsciously.   There's no such word as unsubconsciously.

HoratioTarr wrote:A question for the men on here.  If you met a really attractive woman, dated her and wanted to have sex, but found, to your chagrin, as you peeled off her pink chiffon panties, that she had a big pair of hairy balls and a cock, would you still be attracted to her? 

Would you still think of her as a woman?

Yes

As I was attracted to her looking as a woman

I am not attracted to dicks

It would turn me off

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:and by extension (and agument ad absurdum) if someone in a BMW runs me down would I be wrong in saying I was flattened by a BMW driver (I mean we ALL know about THEM dont we....)

Okay, have you ever been Irish or a Jew?

Or a woman?

Or labelled black?

If no to the above, you have no idea what you are talking about.

really....
I AM half german...and had a share of labels thrown at me by ADULTS in my younger years.....up till i was able to flatten a few on equal terms
I am a druid ...and had plenty.....
I even had a job refused for being a druid....but there was no point complaing since the offender was of an "oppressed minority" that was made plain to me.

do I whinge and complain about being an oppressed minority...Do I play the "insult to family"? do I play upon the heartstrings with faux outrage?

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:Unsubconciously

Is that even a word??

Where is Jules? See loves to pick people up for bad English

It's either consciously, or subconsciously.   There's no such word as unsubconsciously.

Indeed, I am wrong, i should have said conciously with you

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:but...doesnt the same apply to lanky...ok not "racsit in the strict sense but perjorative surely in that use

So let me get this understand this

You "lanky dog"

What ethnic groups is lanky?

You could not judge a barbie contest

AHHH I see......... you are (VERY) selective in your perjoratives ......

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:Unsubconciously

Is that even a word??

Where is Jules? See loves to pick people up for bad English

It's either consciously, or subconsciously.   There's no such word as unsubconsciously.

I know this, I knew this when I answered, but if I'd picked didge up on it he'd have spent two hours explaining why this was probably a real word somewhere in the world and after all, what are words anyway blah blah and he must be right because he said so.

So you see my dilemma.

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Okay, have you ever been Irish or a Jew?

Or a woman?

Or labelled black?

If no to the above, you have no idea what you are talking about.

really....
I AM half german...and had a share of labels thrown at me by ADULTS in my younger years.....up till i was able to flatten a few on equal terms
I am a druid ...and had plenty.....
I even had a job refused for being a druid....but there was no point complaing since the offender was of an "oppressed minority"    that was made plain to me.

do I whinge and complain about being an oppressed minority...Do I play the "insult to family"? do I play upon the heartstrings with faux outrage?

What is half German, but a label?
I am sorry you were discriminated against, but it pails into comparrison when my father was refused every job in Northern Ireland for simple being a Cathiolic. Its why he joined the British Army and why i am British.

You still do not get the point do you?

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

So let me get this understand this

You "lanky dog"

What ethnic groups is lanky?

You could not judge a barbie contest

AHHH I see......... you are (VERY) selective in your perjoratives ......

Well this can be resolved

Is it racist to label a person based on their crimes based on their skin colour or who they are?

eddie wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:


It's either consciously, or subconsciously.   There's no such word as unsubconsciously.

I know this, I knew this when I answered, but if I'd picked didge up on it he'd have spent two hours explaining why this was probably a real word somewhere in the world and after all, what are words anyway blah blah and he must be right because he said so.

So you see my dilemma.

So you will see I admitted i was in error

You see, it tool me 5 minutes

I am waiting 1 hour and counting for your apologism

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:erm...is mugabe black...or is my colour vision going awry?
Is smelly suggesting he's a dog because he's black?
or is he calling him a dog becasue of his actions?

would you say its wrong to call a tall person who thumps you a "lanky twat"

cos its the same argument

you are placing a descriptive label onto someone?

Is Mugabe Black?

well he sure as hell aint green

Or is he simple an evil human

The label you apply is not a label you would ever apply to many criminals

That is institutional racism

Its you ignoring the label and being selective on what is wrong

Let me get this straight

I do not want to see smelly punished, but it proves you allow racism

I mean what would you say, if someone said the Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu was a Jewish Dog?

Do you nollt understand that the words "black" and "Jewish" make it emphatically racist?

can you imagine the world of didge..

police put out a description of a wanted suspect ..."all officers please be on the lookout for a human being"

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

So let me get this understand this

You "lanky dog"

What ethnic groups is lanky?

You could not judge a barbie contest

AHHH I see......... you are (VERY) selective in your perjoratives ......

Well this can be resolved

Is it racist to label a person based on their crimes based on their skin colour or who they are?

in the descriptive sense their skin colour is part of " who they are" as much as their height weight and eye colour... see my point above

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Is Mugabe Black?

well he sure as hell aint green

Or is he simple an evil human

The label you apply is not a label you would ever apply to many criminals

That is institutional racism

Its you ignoring the label and being selective on what is wrong

Let me get this straight

I do not want to see smelly punished, but it proves you allow racism

I mean what would you say, if someone said the Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu was a Jewish Dog?

Do you nollt understand that the words "black" and "Jewish" make it emphatically racist?

can you imagine the world of didge..

police put out a description of a wanted suspect ..."all officers please be on the lookout for a human being"  

Well is he noty known?

So you are telling me on a discription of Hitler, people would need to know he was a social construct?

White ?

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Well this can be resolved

Is it racist to label a person based on their crimes based on their skin colour or who they are?

in the descriptive sense their skin colour is part of " who they are" as much as their height weight and eye colour... see my point above

In summer or winter?

Do you know what

For once I wish veya was here'

He would be appalled at this applogist bullshit

I cannot believe the day Victor would defend racism

I have never seen him refer to Hitler as anything white, but evil

I am ashamed

if you were seriously looking for him in a multiethnic community and wanted everyone (given that somewhere there would be bound to be someone who didnt know who he was) to know who you wanted then yes one supposes that you would mention white...along with the silly tache and the fact he was a short arse etc...

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Well this can be resolved

Is it racist to label a person based on their crimes based on their skin colour or who they are?

in the descriptive sense their skin colour is part of " who they are" as much as their height weight and eye colour... see my point above

In summer or winter?

why do folks change colour dramatically due to temperature??? (well apart from some vain females)?

Lord Foul wrote:if you were seriously looking for him in a multiethnic community and wanted everyone (given that somewhere there would be bound to be someone who didnt know who he was) to know who you wanted then yes one supposes that you would mention white...along with the silly tache and the fact he was a short arse etc...

So if you were looking for Hitler which actually happened by the way

Did skin colour factor in this?

You have not got a clue and even worse you try to defend calling a criminal because he is labelled black okay to cast his criminality off this by defining him this way

Are you claiming his skin colour made him evil?

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


In summer or winter?

why do folks change colour dramatically due to temperature??? (well apart from some vain females)?

So in summer in Argentina (Germany's Winter) they would never suspect anyone with tanned would they.

Welcome inspector Clueless