Paid Members Halitosis Romantic Posted March 9, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 9, 2012 Ah, the "let's all move on now". Classic refuge of the person whose argument is broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snitsky's back acne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Ah, the "let's all move on now". Classic refuge of the person whose argument is broken. Â [sIGH] Oh for Christs Sake! Â Look, if you want to continue the debate, I'm more than happy to do so. I've agreed with certain points other people have made as well as contributing my own alternative points of view. It seems pretty pointless to keep going back and forth when there is clearly a strong contrast of views, but if you'd like to, that's fine. Â If not - let's move on, yeah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Halitosis Romantic Posted March 9, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 9, 2012 Right. It's basically not name calling if you're exposing a negative character trait that this person has been hiding. A good friend of mine wilfully misunderstood the whole thing, probably because he's quite anti-WWE these days, when he said the Eve was getting "slut shamed". She's not, the insults being thrown at her have been wholly earned due to her behavior. Â And suggesting that, because views are quite polarized about this, the discussion is over, is quite ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) You haven't contributed your own point of view at all, really, SBA. You've suggested (pretended?) that this "WWE IS THE HYPOCRITE OF ALL HYPOCRITES" stuff is not you presenting your own opinion, but presenting the opinion of unnamed oversensitive ninnies. Whose opinion you disagree with, but have a deep understanding of. You've yet to explain why, in the opinions of those ninnies, Cena's allowed to comment on Rock's behaviour but not Eve's. For example: Â Now, if I were going round saying 'Bullying is wrong. We need to make a stand against this. Come on everyone, join my campaign' [which Cena is doing by wearing the shirt that supports and endorses the BA Star anti-bullying campaign] and then started calling people names, I would, quite rightly, be branded a hypocrite. Why weren't you coming out with this when Rock called Cena a bitch, or Punk took the mick out of Miz's mean face, or Lawler called Cole an idiot? What is it that's so special about Eve that suddenly it qualifies for all the ZOMG THE B A STAR CAMPAIGN IS A FRAUD, THIS IS DIABOLICAL sort of hysteria? Edited March 9, 2012 by King Pitcos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Halitosis Romantic Posted March 9, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 9, 2012 You haven't contributed your own point of view at all, really. You've suggested (pretended?) that this "WWE IS THE HYPOCRITE OF ALL HYPOCRITES" stuff is not you presenting your own opinion, but presenting the opinion of unnamed oversensitive ninnies. You've yet to explain why, in the opinions of those ninnies, Cena's allowed to comment on Rock's behaviour but not Eve's. For example:Â Now, if I were going round saying 'Bullying is wrong. We need to make a stand against this. Come on everyone, join my campaign' [which Cena is doing by wearing the shirt that supports and endorses the BA Star anti-bullying campaign] and then started calling people names, I would, quite rightly, be branded a hypocrite. Why weren't you coming out with this when Rock called Cena a bitch, or Punk took the mick out of Miz's mean face, or Lawler called Cole an idiot? What is it that's so special about Eve that suddenly it qualifies for all the ZOMG THE B A STAR CAMPAIGN IS A FRAUD, THIS IS DIABOLICAL sort of hysteria? Â That's a leading question right there, Pitcos. SBA, I urge you not to answer, for fear of incriminating yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snitsky's back acne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 You haven't contributed your own point of view at all, really, SBA. You've suggested (pretended?) that this "WWE IS THE HYPOCRITE OF ALL HYPOCRITES" stuff is not you presenting your own opinion, but presenting the opinion of unnamed oversensitive ninnies. Whose opinion you disagree with, but have a deep understanding of. You've yet to explain why, in the opinions of those ninnies, Cena's allowed to comment on Rock's behaviour but not Eve's. For example:Â Now, if I were going round saying 'Bullying is wrong. We need to make a stand against this. Come on everyone, join my campaign' [which Cena is doing by wearing the shirt that supports and endorses the BA Star anti-bullying campaign] and then started calling people names, I would, quite rightly, be branded a hypocrite. Why weren't you coming out with this when Rock called Cena a bitch, or Punk took the mick out of Miz's mean face, or Lawler called Cole an idiot? What is it that's so special about Eve that suddenly it qualifies for all the ZOMG THE B A STAR CAMPAIGN IS A FRAUD, THIS IS DIABOLICAL sort of hysteria? Â Okay, clearly you're NOT wanting to move on from this then. Fair enough. Â If you go back and read my posts you'll see I've repeatedly stated my own personal stance on the matter. Â I've never once stated the 'WWE IS THE HYPOCRITE OF ALL HYPOCRITES' as you put it - merely that certain events, such as Cena's name calling of Eve [which the original post that has lead to all of this was about] be viewed as hypocritical, in my opinion. I have also not said that Cena is 'allowed to comment on The Rock's behaviour but not Eve's'. Furthermore, I have also not said that 'THE B A STAR CAMPAIGN IS A FRAUD, THIS IS DIABOLICAL' but, hey, let's not let actual facts get in the way of you and your agenda, eh? Â Nothing is 'so special about Eve' as you put it. She was the topic of the debate [along with Cena and Foley's thoughts on the matter]. Â You [predictably] are trying to make this into something it's not because it involves me making a comment about something that involves a female wrestling personality - another thing you seem to have the inability to move on from. Â Incidentally, 'boshealecta' also made a post stating that they felt Cena kissing Eve and then calling her a name did make him 'seem a bit bully like' yet nobody appears to be calling him on it. Funny that. Â Pitcos, the debate didn't involve you. You've decided to chip in [as usual] with your childish rhetoric, stating things that you think I've said but actually haven't. Sure, chime in with your opinion. It's an open forum. It's just a shame you can't ever do that when it involves me without making it personal, which you did by stating 'You're the type of person who...' a couple of posts ago. Â I didn't mention CM Punk's comments to The Miz about his face, or Lawler's comments to Cole because that wasn't the discussion that was taking place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 If you go back and read my posts you'll see I've repeatedly stated my own personal stance on the matter. I've never once stated the 'WWE IS THE HYPOCRITE OF ALL HYPOCRITES' as you put it - merely that certain events, such as Cena's name calling of Eve [which the original post that has lead to all of this was about] be viewed as hypocritical, in my opinion. As you're trying to use semantics to avoid saying what you really mean here, I'll rephrase: Why can Cena's name calling of Eve be viewed as hypocritical, in your opinion, but Cena's name calling of Rock, Punk making fun of Miz, Lawler's name calling of Cole, etc etc can't?  You [predictably] are trying to make this into something it's not because it involves me making a comment about something that involves a female wrestling personality I'm not making "this" into anything, I'm wondering why you chose this specific instance out of... Well, the vast majority of wrestling promos in the last year... to decide WWE can be seen as hypocritical with the anti-bullying campaign.  I didn't mention CM Punk's comments to The Miz about his face, or Lawler's comments to Cole because that wasn't the discussion that was taking place. No, I did. And you seem to be shying away from condemning (sorry, I mean explaining why the unnamed sensitive activists you disagree with didn't condemn) those instances of "bullying", which is awfully curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snitsky's back acne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 If you go back and read my posts you'll see I've repeatedly stated my own personal stance on the matter. I've never once stated the 'WWE IS THE HYPOCRITE OF ALL HYPOCRITES' as you put it - merely that certain events, such as Cena's name calling of Eve [which the original post that has lead to all of this was about] be viewed as hypocritical, in my opinion. As you're trying to use semantics to avoid saying what you really mean here, I'll rephrase: Why can Cena's name calling of Eve be viewed as hypocritical, in your opinion, but Cena's name calling of Rock, Punk making fun of Miz, Lawler's name calling of Cole, etc etc can't?  You [predictably] are trying to make this into something it's not because it involves me making a comment about something that involves a female wrestling personality I'm not making "this" into anything, I'm wondering why you chose this specific instance out of... Well, the vast majority of wrestling promos in the last year... to decide WWE can be seen as hypocritical with the anti-bullying campaign.  I didn't mention CM Punk's comments to The Miz about his face, or Lawler's comments to Cole because that wasn't the discussion that was taking place. No, I did. And you seem to be shying away from condemning (sorry, I mean explaining why the unnamed sensitive activists you disagree with didn't condemn) those instances of "bullying", which is awfully curious.  re: comment 1: 'Why can Cena's name calling of Eve be viewed as hypocritical, in your opinion, but Cena's name calling of Rock, Punk making fun of Miz, Lawler's name calling of Cole, etc etc can't?'.  Never said it can't - both those examples, if we're working under the context of name calling [which we are], would be considered in the same league as Cena's comments to Eve on the 'hypocrisy' scale. Just using the example of CM Punk and Lawler though, seeing as you brought them up. Punk was condemned last year, by the WWE office if we are to believe the reports, for yelling at a fan in Australia and calling him names. Lawler, also if we are to believe the reports, was specifically told by WWE to stop calling Vickie Guerrero names as they felt it was not a good thing for an on-air personality to do when they were so strongly promoting an anti-bullying campaign.  Now, if the company themselves has actively castigated performers or told them to cease from calling certain performers names on-air then surely they a] consider name calling a serious enough thing to do something about it and b] are being hypocritical by then allowing another performer [ANY performer] to do it.  re: comment 2: We weren't talking about 'the vast majority of wrestling promos in the last year' we were talking about Mick Foley's comments about the specific incident involving Cena and Eve. So as regards to 'why I chose' to comment on it - I didn't. Mick Foley did, and I stated that I felt he had a valid point.  re: comment 3: I'm not 'shying away' from condemning those acts of 'bullying' you brought up because they weren't even part of the equation until your last post. I have now addressed them in my response above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Now, if the company themselves has actively castigated performers or told them to cease from calling certain performers names on-air then surely they a] consider name calling a serious enough thing to do something about it and b] are being hypocritical by then allowing another performer [ANY performer] to do it. Yes, that statement is true, but only if the person judging its truth is a fully-fledged mongol with no sense at all of perspective or context. In reality, CM Punk calling fans queers and Jerry Lawler calling Vickie Guerrero fat/ugly (which still goes on, by the way, so it might be a better issue to hang your coif on) are an entirely different beast than wrestlers insulting each other based on their characters' actions. John Cena calling Eve a hoeski only qualifies as bullying in the same way that Big Show calling Daniel Bryan an arrogant little ass is bullying (ie not at all, if you're a sentient lifeform). "ALL CONFLICT IS BULLYING!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snitsky's back acne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Now, if the company themselves has actively castigated performers or told them to cease from calling certain performers names on-air then surely they a] consider name calling a serious enough thing to do something about it and b] are being hypocritical by then allowing another performer [ANY performer] to do it. Yes, that statement is true, but only if the person judging its truth is a fully-fledged mongol with no sense at all of perspective or context. In reality, CM Punk calling fans queers and Jerry Lawler calling Vickie Guerrero fat/ugly (which still goes on, by the way, so it might be a better issue to hang your coif on) are an entirely different beast than wrestlers insulting each other based on their characters' actions. John Cena calling Eve a hoeski only qualifies as bullying in the same way that Big Show calling Daniel Bryan an arrogant little ass is bullying (ie not at all, if you're a sentient lifeform). "ALL CONFLICT IS BULLYING!" Â Never said it isn't. Â You're essentially arguing with yourself now, to be fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Never said it isn't. And that's why everyone's been telling you you're talking wet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snitsky's back acne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Never said it isn't. And that's why everyone's been telling you you're talking wet. Â Fair enough - that wasn't the point of the entire debate but, hey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Only it was. You (or your unnamed sources that you "disagree with") decided -- wrongly -- that standard conflict between characters was bullying and thus grand hypocrisy from a company doing an anti-bullying campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snitsky's back acne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Only it was. You (or your unnamed sources that you "disagree with") decided -- wrongly -- that standard conflict between characters was bullying and thus grand hypocrisy from a company doing an anti-bullying campaign. Â My God, you are STILL on this!? Â I've never claimed to have 'sources'. Â Just one thing though - your statement 'you decided, wrongly, that standard conflict between characters was bullying'. Â Okay. Â Didn't you just say 'ALL CONFLICT IS BULLYING'? Â How can all conflict be bullying if, according to you, I'm wrong that ..... conflict is bullying? Explain that one to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted March 9, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 9, 2012 Didn't you just say 'ALL CONFLICT IS BULLYING'? Â How can all conflict be bullying if, according to you, I'm wrong that ..... conflict is bullying? Explain that one to me. Â Pretty sure he wasn't being serious there. Was that not clear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts