If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Thantanos jr - censorship
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I liked this site when I first logged on....it was interesting to view ideas/opinions from the British perspective and to trade a few licks with each other (I find the Brits have an interesting sense of humor).
Now it seems the Administrators have shut off a person because his opinions are unpopular. I saw in one instance where he was warned, though Admin made no mention of the foul context from the people he was debating (it was much worse to say the least).
If you are going to silence him then it is only fair that you silence those who argued against him as well......otherwise it's censorship, plain and simple.
Oh, that's right.......that's why we Americans left your shit hole country in the first place.
[This message has been edited by Sportster 1200C (edited 21-08-2001).]
Now it seems the Administrators have shut off a person because his opinions are unpopular. I saw in one instance where he was warned, though Admin made no mention of the foul context from the people he was debating (it was much worse to say the least).
If you are going to silence him then it is only fair that you silence those who argued against him as well......otherwise it's censorship, plain and simple.
Oh, that's right.......that's why we Americans left your shit hole country in the first place.
[This message has been edited by Sportster 1200C (edited 21-08-2001).]
0
Comments
cant say he'll be missed.
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
Girl from Mars, I'll miss him....It was interesting having someone that didnt go along with every politically correct idea going at the time just to look cool. I come to this site to talk about politics with different people...Theres now one less point of view..I now wonder how long it will be until I come upon a subject that the admin dont like and I am kicked off as well.
I think by banning him the admins just went to prove the Americans point about how Britain is today.
Just a thought for you...but, we are in YOUR living room...we came to visit and not just be boorish...if the discussion is open then so be it...warning and then banning someone for rather innocent comments will probably get rid of any unwanted or differently organized viewpoint and puting the 'visitor' in their 'place' but what does it show your british poster?
Thanatos Jr. is a decent young man who is proud of being a US Marine with all its traditions and standards...I have personally met him and like him...he is intelligent, handsom, a firearms entusiast and sportsman...he also has a sence of humour and while termanology may different from here to 'there' it did not appear to have been posted in order to be mean spirited or onerous...challenging perhaps...for we must always challenge ourselves (first).
The truth is we, US, don't know much about you and generally had little if any communication with UK or the english in general...before the internet. There is and always will be an underlying distrust between US and YOU because of our past histories...this is not necessarily bad...just an appreciation of the differences.
Diesel
888888888
1200, if you left England that implies that you are English and then became a Yankee.
Slug
When in trouble or in doubt,
Run in circles scream and shout.........
and do it loud
I realize that the English don't actually believe that others are entitled to any real respect, preferring to hold themselves above the riff-raff, but it seems the young man got the shirtlifters here upset. A quite adult reaction, banning him while others are ignored for the same behavior. His argument has been made by your actions.
It is possible to have a heated debate without using offensive terms. I pretty much agree with Tj about gays in the military but I don't agree with the way he reffered too them.
Face it folks...our termanology is different...things that offend you mean absolutely nothing here, vice versa!
Consider, I innocently used the word 'wog' in order to avoid offending anyone...and the dreck hit the fan...I was soundly 'put in my place' for the indiscretion, etc. Here the term is no more offensive than to say 'toad' and of course I suppose that intent has to have a lot to do with it.
You english are fond of GAY...and as I pointed out to you it has some insulting overtones to it in US...it's used...but that's not saying much. We have an organization in Seattle, WA, USA, that is named "Queer Nation" and I assure you that nothing less than blaitant use of the most derogatory adjetives will satisfy them in describing who and what they are...go figure, they don't care much for gay as such!
Time for lunch, Ta!
Diesel
88888888
thesite doesnt have anything against marines, thats laughable. but both the thanatos's had quite abhorrent views which just arent acceptable here. which i presume is why they were both banned. what does it matter which coast they live on? still hold views that they express in a way that isnt appropriate to this board.
and diesel, you DO know that "ta" means thank you and not goodbye? that would be "tata". but its not really a common way to sign off a post... ah well, maybe you DID mean it in the usual way.
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
Yes he will. Just becuase his views differed from mine doesn't mean I wanted to see him banned. The very fact that he disagrees makes me look at my own views and identify just how strongly I hold those views and what it is that supports them. I'd like to think that I have 'right' on my side, but then so does he.
However, this is an internet site, and it has rules which you must agree to when you sign up. The moderators have the right to eject anyone they find offensive. This ISN'T a place of free speech and that is made abundantly clear on sign up.
As Diesel said we are all guests, and guests have to abide by the house rules, or the owner will kick you out (or in the US - shoot you <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">).
Yes, I'll miss having him around. Ultimately, though, the mods' word is law and we have to live with it, like it or loathe it.
Of course, anyone wanting to continue the discussion could always do it in that uncensored medium of email... <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Its just glaring hypocracy when they ban Than and Than jr for bad language when just about every thread here degrades into swearing and vulgarity...
Its just sad they feel the need to ban people that dont tow the politically correct line of this site.
It's his overall attitude and the way he expressed his strong opinions using obscene language.
I think if the rest of of us can voice our strong opinions without it degrading into some sort of foul lauguage competition then that shows a great deal of composure, intelligence and dignity.
This is something that the USA has yet to master, and judging by the USA contigent of labotmised halfwits that post on here, i severely doubt that will ever change <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
ROFLMFAO....read the thread again..hell read your own posts....Im sorry but I cant see why Thanatos using obscene language is any worse than the rest of us using obscene language..Take a look through the posts on this site and just count how many threads DONT include the words 'fuck' 'shit' 'bollocks' or some variation thereof..you can probably count them on one hand.
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
It would be nice to hear from the mod that banned them though. Even thought I doubt very much they will show themselves as the banning was completely uncalled for and extremely hypocritical.
The quote which offended the mods - for those who can't be arsed to check...
In context, it was intended to offend - in order to make his point. I personally had no problem with it.
Blatantly homophobic, something which can get you banned from the site, as can racism, sexism. Perhaps if there was an ounce of fact in here, or perhaps in the language was tempered the mods wouldn't have had a problem.
Maybe they were banned for 'foul language' of maybe some of these had something to do with it. Either way the mods have the final say. like it or not. and if not...no-one keeps you here, you could leave at any time. as could I.
I dont think the swearing was the issue, more the fact he insulted people in a way that was not nessesary for example his comment about doing me up the arse!!!!! Is there really a need to even have this debate when u all know its down to the way he referred to gays etc and basically threw insults and names around when he could have made his point without any of it. Im sure you are not silly and can see deep down the reasons for him being banned, because the majority of people here seem to be able to see it!
Stop kissing their arses .. do you think they're gonna come and hunt you down cos only one of them serves in the [joke]US Marines [/joke] .. just get on with it and don't bother if someone gets 'banned from a message board.'
You have a life don't you?
Get on with it !!!!!!
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
His point would have been made stonger if he hadn't used offensive terms towards a respectible memebr of the site. Grow up coz you can have a debate without offending anyone. Foul language is not what I mean, it's the fact what you say may be hurtful and damaging to some posters on this board. Just take it easy. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/wink.gif">
- Skive
It seems to me that Girl-From-Mars has been far more insulting overall than either of the individuals banned, yet here she sits. Only one person posted the comment in reference to lolly's arse, but two have been banned. I wonder if this is how the voting for the six counties was done?
So, calling gay people 'cocksuckers', 'shirtlifters', and so on, and saying they were more worried about their nails than fighting, is not offensive?
NOTE that it wasnt FOUL language they were banned for, but for referring to homosexuals in derogatory terms. With temperate, non-homophobic, language, they would still be here- quite simple, even for a Yank squaddie to understand.
Quite what personally abusing GFM brings to this topic I dont know, except to prove what Karla did to be correct.
Use appropriate nouns and you will be able to make whatever point you want.
It matters not who won or lost, but how you place the blame.
bizarre, totally bizarre. you mean in that comment there? merely pointing out why they were banned? :S
and yeah, what kermit said. its not difficult to work out why they were banned <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/rolleyes.gif">
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
Well done...Just how long did it take you to come up with that one. I dont kiss anyones arse...I really couldnt give a shit what the Thantos' were talking about, what im annoyed about is the fact that they were banned for something that is common on this site for the simple reason they have different views on gays..Also BOTH were banned for someone that one of them did...Its blatent censorship on the part of the mods to keep thesite from altering from its politically correct stance.
PS, no, I dont actually have a life. I live in Hertfordshire <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
MOK, Im afraid theres no facts that back up homosexuals being 'born' gay..There is as much credence in his comments of homosexuality being a 'mental disorder' than of anyone elses comments of people just 'being' gay. I personally enjoy hearing other peoples opinions, however different they are to my own.
I cant see how Thanatos calling a gay man, a "cocksucker" is any worse than Powerslave telling me to "fuck off and drop dead"..I find that offensive and yet because its not directed at a politically correct minority, none of you see any problem with it..
Balddog-
"Homosexuality - 'being sexually attracted only by members of one's own sex' according to the Oxford Dictionary. Unfortunately, behavioural scientists tell us that this definition is too simplistic. Sexuality is a complex matter: many people are not exclusive in their sexual inclinations. A classification system,[1] devised in the 1940s by Alfred Kinsey, rates an exclusively heterosexual person as Kinsey 0 and an exclusively homosexual person as Kinsey 6, the continuum between 0 and 6 covering varying degrees of bisexuality. In addition to this spectrum of preference, desire may not correlate with behaviour. Therefore, the term 'sexual orientation' is now used to describe a person's predominant sexual preference.
19th Century medics attributed homosexuality to moral degeneracy, mental illness and 'congenital anomaly'. The 20th Century has seen hormonal imbalance, psychosocial influences and biological factors named as possible suspects. The American Psychiatric Association cancelled homosexuality's pathological classification in 1974. Now that it has gained 'non-pathological status', it is increasingly hard to challenge the prevailing views on homosexuality's causation.
Bancroft, in a British Journal of Psychiatry editorial,[2] wrote, 'This is an area, par excellence, where scientific objectivity has little chance of survival'. It certainly is easy to bring preconceptions to scientific investigation. We are always tempted to view the facts selectively in order to verify our convictions. Researchers who have the added motivation of changing public opinion will be guided along certain channels in their work. Journalists can bring their private social agendas to bear by selective and sensational reporting of research findings. Tenuous conjecture is portrayed as certain conclusion to a gullible public. Of course, it's quite appropriate for the public to be responsibly informed about scientific discoveries; however, twenty-second sound-bites cannot do justice to complex controversies."
There is no conclusive evidence either way, but as ever that is what we look for, one of the two extremes. The truth is likely to be a mix of answers, 'cos nothings ever simple, as with the Nature/Nurture effecting Personality debate. But the "mental disorder" opinion was dropped a long time ago.
Only users lose drugs
As it goes I believe that people are born gay..I was just highlighting the fact that Thanatos stated AN opinion..Its an opinion shared by a great many people. To dismiss it as false just doesnt wash..Until it is proved 100% that homosexuality isnt a choice/mental illness/learned behaviour/whatever then its unfair and wrong to dismiss those explainations..Unless you can prove without doubt that something is false then dont dismiss it.
Do you not understand the word "overall"? I've read a great deal of the "attitude" you choose to post, and it is far more insulting than the language of the two Americans.
As for their language, I doubt seriously that either used the phrase "shirtlifter". I might have, but Americans prefer more direct adjectives.
It is obvious that the real "wogs" are the moderators of this forum. They are the ones who are inferior to the rest of the world and unwilling to consider other points of view. What a load of bullocks!
Balddog, I was just pointing out that even in the US homosexuality has not been classed as a mental illness since 1974, something Thanatos didn't seem to be aware of. Kinda like calling dyslexic people stupid for not being able to spell.
Xenophobia? Opinions and perspectives OUTSIDE of what you congratulate each other for? The chutzpah to stand firmly against the the bulk of you? Committed to THEIR beliefs, at LEAST to the degree that you are to yours?
A "little" foul language by others here...?
Seems to me that Thanatos APOLOGIZED in the post, and stated CLEARLY that he was attempting to communuicate an example, rather than actually tendering an invitation...
... and lolly stating that she was NOT insulted by the comment, no more than if he had presented her with a bouquet of flowers!
Seems that what Thanatos CONSISTENTLY held to is that INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS have no place in a military context, and CERTAINLY not in a battlefield situation.
What I DO know of Thanatos, from his posts on other forums, is that he served two tours (that is... MORE than two years) in Vietnam, IN HEAVY COMBAT. His perspectives are CERTAINLY as valid as any of those who have NOT served in combat, regardless of whether you agree OR disagree with his individual moral perspective.
From other vet and military forums, he has presented himself as VERY supportive of females in the military, but in support roles, rather than combat deployment. Seems that someone who HAS endured heavy combat MIGHT have a reason for their perspective.
Guess that it is easier to congratulate each other on your cookie cutter opinions than to actually CONFRONT the opposing view, is it not???