I always thought ITT= In this thread.
GLAAD
- Thread starter UltimateHitman
- Start date
Hyorinmaru
Sit Upon The Frozen Heavens
shut it
Obviously, you don't understand the meaning of the word "hypocrite".
If GLAAD were to be hypocrites, they might call a black person a ******. That would make them hypocrites. Not publicly (of course, you have no idea what they do privately, way to make yourself look stupid) taking TNA to task doesn't make them a hypocrite, it just means it's not a battle they chose to fight at that time in the public arena, for whatever reason they may have. It'd be like John Cena wrestling in a Chicago house show, but not an Indianapolis house show. It doesn't make him a hypocrite, he's still committed to what he's doing, it just means he didn't want to work in Indianapolis at that time.
So, like I said, you obviously don't understand what the word "hypocrite" means. It's hard to "connect the dots", when you are using words completely wrong.
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
Theory: GLAAD is hypocritical.
Fact: Glad publicly approached WWE because they disapproved of an employee using homosexual references in a negative fashion on a television program.
Fact: (Regardless of number of viewers, "nobody watches TNA" blah, blah, blah the basic principle of derogatory use does not change, and it is broadcast on television) TNA employee or employees used a homosexual reference in a negative fashion on a television program.
(from merriam-webster.com)
Definition of HYPOCRITICAL
: characterized by hypocrisy; also : being a hypocrite
hyp·o·crite
noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\
Definition of HYPOCRITE
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Going by number 2, GLAAD's stated beliefs or feelings are that the homosexual community is treated unfairly by a public figure on a television show using a negative/derogatory slur. TNA programming also had a public figure on a television show using a negative/derogatory slur about homosexuals.
By not following through with TNA (you can surmise that they don't want to do anything publicly, but unless you work for them that is only assumption also. Nice to point out another person's assumption yet make your own), they are saying that one wrestling company's usage of the word is more acceptable than another one's. This would be acting in contradiction to the stated belief and/or feeling that usage of the word in a derogatory fashion is wrong by public figures on television and that something needs to be done about it publicly.
So while I know you can never be wrong, you are.
Btw, just because you're making a point doesn't mean you have to call people stupid to try to undermine their opinion.
Fact: Glad publicly approached WWE because they disapproved of an employee using homosexual references in a negative fashion on a television program.
Fact: (Regardless of number of viewers, "nobody watches TNA" blah, blah, blah the basic principle of derogatory use does not change, and it is broadcast on television) TNA employee or employees used a homosexual reference in a negative fashion on a television program.
(from merriam-webster.com)
Definition of HYPOCRITICAL
: characterized by hypocrisy; also : being a hypocrite
hyp·o·crite
noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\
Definition of HYPOCRITE
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Going by number 2, GLAAD's stated beliefs or feelings are that the homosexual community is treated unfairly by a public figure on a television show using a negative/derogatory slur. TNA programming also had a public figure on a television show using a negative/derogatory slur about homosexuals.
By not following through with TNA (you can surmise that they don't want to do anything publicly, but unless you work for them that is only assumption also. Nice to point out another person's assumption yet make your own), they are saying that one wrestling company's usage of the word is more acceptable than another one's. This would be acting in contradiction to the stated belief and/or feeling that usage of the word in a derogatory fashion is wrong by public figures on television and that something needs to be done about it publicly.
So while I know you can never be wrong, you are.
Btw, just because you're making a point doesn't mean you have to call people stupid to try to undermine their opinion.
Wow...I can only assume you are truly this stupid, as I don't think anyone could pretend by saying the things you're saying and pull it off. And I'm not calling you stupid to undermine your opinion, you truly are stupid if you think inaction is the same as hypocrisy. There's no other way to say it, you are stupid.
Inaction and hypocrisy have completely different meanings. Did GLAAD endorse TNA's use of homophobic slur? No? Then it's not hypocritical. Did they endorse any other kind of slur? No? Then it's not hypocritical. You're completely wrong on this, simply because you don't understand the meanings of words. For GLAAD to be hypocrites, they would have to actively endorse the opposite of their cause. Inaction is not the same as endorsement.
GLAAD is against anyone using a homophobic slur. But just because they don't take everyone to task when they do, that doesn't make them hypocrites. I don't see how someone could mistake inaction for hypocrisy, unless they are just too stupid to understand the true definitions of the word.
Oh, and I never said GLAAD discussed the issue privately with TNA, so you're 0 for 2 in that area as well. All I said is that it's possible, but since you don't know, you make yourself look stupid by alleging something you have ZERO factual evidence of.
If you really are pretending to be this dumb, then hats off to you, you're doing a mighty fine job of pretending. Personally, I think it's not an act.
Wait. Is the TNA case the one where Anderson said that professor spreaded gay rumors about him? Ignoring the fact that unlike Cole, he never referred to homosexuals in a derogatory sense and that he personally said he never held anything against them, that he was just simply not one? Panties in a bunch much, society?
Serious Mozzarella
Special Victims Unit
He didn't call you stupid to undermine your opinion. He called you stupid because you're stupid.
Edit: Wow, Sly already said that shit.
Goliath Uterus
Getting Noticed By Management
From what I hear, that GLAAD group is a bunch of ******s anyway, so their opinion doesn't even matter.
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
WWE is a wrestling company on television. TNA is a wrestling company on television. They both used homosexual slurs in their programming. One is taken action against the other is not. They are both publicly accessible shows, henceforth the slurs have the same impact. To ignore one company's slur and focus on the other's is acting in contradiction to one's beliefs that slurs on television from employees of a professional wrestling (or entertainment) organization are wrong. Inaction towards one and action towards the other is contradicting one's self.
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Read: contradiction.
And it's awfully funny that the actions of people in this thread prove that tolerance of others is not a two way street, just like I said in a prior post.
It's also funny that all of you supposedly "more intelligent" posters are resorting to name calling when you have chided others for it. Proves who the stupid ones really are when you can't discuss something without talking down and berating people. Hats off fellas.
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Read: contradiction.
And it's awfully funny that the actions of people in this thread prove that tolerance of others is not a two way street, just like I said in a prior post.
It's also funny that all of you supposedly "more intelligent" posters are resorting to name calling when you have chided others for it. Proves who the stupid ones really are when you can't discuss something without talking down and berating people. Hats off fellas.
Tiger Chaos Theory
You ain't drawin' shit!
Are you trying to apply context and logic here? get the fuck out with that useless shit.
It's not naming calling when it's true.
What do you not understand? Do you know what a contradiction is? GLAAD didn't contradict themselves, they just didn't publicly come out against TNA. Unless you have some proof that GLAAD says it is okay for TNA to do it but not WWE, or if you have proof GLAAD has used slurs against another group of people, then it can't be a contradiction. They aren't saying one thing and doing another. They are saying one thing to one company. That's it.
My God, you're not very bright. Go look up the meaning of words before you start posting about them.
DirtyJosé
Best angle of all: retirement
I love that classic homophobic argument that being supportive of Gay Rights is intolerance towards the intolerant. I fully support you in your right to be a bigoted idiot if you so chose. I'm not telling you that you can't get married and have kids (even if you probably should never breed), and I fully support your right to say whatever dumb shit you want to.
Oh man, this is too rich.
Oh man, this is too rich.
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
Inaction can be a form of hypocrisy, plain and simple. If I speak out against animal cruelty and see two different neighbors beating their dog, yet I only turn the one guy in because he's smaller than me, then yes, I am a hypocrite. A coward, yes, but also a hypocrite.
Inaction being a form of hypocrisy is the same thing as assault being a form of aggression. Can a person be aggressive and not commit assault? Yes, they can. They can be verbally aggressive, for example. They can vandalize property. Assault is simply one form of aggressive behavior. Nobody's saying that if you pick up a dictionary that the two words have the exact same definition listed for both. That's a pretty lame reason to use just for the sake of being right.
A person's inaction can show hypocrisy the same way a person committing an action that goes against what they preach can be hypocrisy. Sorry, but it can.
No public action has been taken against TNA for the same exact use of derogatory homosexual references that they took action against WWE for. They are both public television shows. They should hold them both to the same standards. They didn't, hence hypocritical.
And I know you're the "almighty" Sly, but the only thing bigger than your position on this forum is your inflated cranium. I figured you, of all people, could discuss something maturely. However, in my time on this site you have proven me horribly wrong. Just because you can be a dick doesn't mean you have to be. Words of wisdom, grasshopper.
Inaction being a form of hypocrisy is the same thing as assault being a form of aggression. Can a person be aggressive and not commit assault? Yes, they can. They can be verbally aggressive, for example. They can vandalize property. Assault is simply one form of aggressive behavior. Nobody's saying that if you pick up a dictionary that the two words have the exact same definition listed for both. That's a pretty lame reason to use just for the sake of being right.
A person's inaction can show hypocrisy the same way a person committing an action that goes against what they preach can be hypocrisy. Sorry, but it can.
No public action has been taken against TNA for the same exact use of derogatory homosexual references that they took action against WWE for. They are both public television shows. They should hold them both to the same standards. They didn't, hence hypocritical.
And I know you're the "almighty" Sly, but the only thing bigger than your position on this forum is your inflated cranium. I figured you, of all people, could discuss something maturely. However, in my time on this site you have proven me horribly wrong. Just because you can be a dick doesn't mean you have to be. Words of wisdom, grasshopper.
You don't get it. I'm only a dick to stupid people who continuously argue something they are wrong about. Like, you on this subject, for example.
I don't know how else to explain it, other than to tell you to look up meanings of words you obviously don't understand. Feel free to get pissed because you don't think GLAAD is doing enough, but don't falsely allege them of being hypocrites, as it just makes you look stupid. As other people have noted, you're not getting called stupid for any reason other than the fact you ARE stupid. Quit being stupid, and I'll quit calling you stupid.
But hey, thanks for the advice. After all, you're the first person in the history of the forums to accuse me of having a big ego. How in the world did I get along for the four years before this conversation?
It's real simple. GLAAD got upset with WWE publicly. They didn't get upset with TNA publicly. But until you know the REASON they didn't get upset publicly with TNA, you have ZERO evidence to accuse them of hypocrisy. You can accuse them of being ignorant, of not being vigilant, or even laziness, but you can't accuse them of hypocrisy. Try learning the meanings of the words, maybe purchase a thesaurus while you're at it, and then get back to me.
Until then, I think I'm just gonna start spreading red rep to your account for every stupid post you make after this one. Have a nice day!
EDIT: Oh, by the way, you were wrong. The only thing bigger than my position on this forum (and my cranium, for that matter) is my penis.
DirtyJosé
Best angle of all: retirement
The flaw in all of this is, beyond you just being wrong, is that you are assuming GLAAD has even watched any TNA, let alone any of the events you've cited. WWE is a much more well known company and product publicly (not a knock on TNA, mind you). It's a part of pop culture in a way that TNA simply isn't.
So now that you've sobered up, your argument has gone from "they only want teh money" to "it's not FAIR, IT'S NOT FAIR!".
My god you are one ******ed asshole. I bet you're even enough of a dip shit to try that "I'ma talk down to you because I'm 36 years old and that must mean I know everything"...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
Inaction is a form of hypocrisy. Inaction can also be a form of cowardice or laziness. If you do not take an action, it can mean you're a coward. They publicly denounced WWE's usage of the word, so that rules cowardice out. Inaction can also mean you are lazy. As they are a pretty active organization, that rules out laziness. And per your example, they have shown to have gained a lucrative partnership w/WWE, hence ruling out ignorance.
The only things left are self-serving and selfish, which also denote hypocrisy. Being that if you do something to serve your own ends and not to fully promote your beliefs, then you are also a hypocrite. Hence, again, they are hypocritical.
And no, you didn't piss me off, I was simply pointing out a fact and offering a little advice. Red rep me if you must, even though we're in the cage. That just shows your feathers were the ones that were ruffled, you don't like being contradicted, and hate that I have a point.
Good day to you, sir.
The only things left are self-serving and selfish, which also denote hypocrisy. Being that if you do something to serve your own ends and not to fully promote your beliefs, then you are also a hypocrite. Hence, again, they are hypocritical.
And no, you didn't piss me off, I was simply pointing out a fact and offering a little advice. Red rep me if you must, even though we're in the cage. That just shows your feathers were the ones that were ruffled, you don't like being contradicted, and hate that I have a point.
Good day to you, sir.
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
DirtyJosé;2976206 said:
Well, well. You sure told me.
TNA is the only other professional wrestling organization on television. If you think that they don't have access to information about the usage of derogatory words on their programming also you're deluded.
However, after responding to you earlier, and seeing how you're all over Sly's nutsack, I would have to say that, or something presumably worse, is apparent.
As I said in your rep, you obviously haven't studied your dictionary yet. I find it funny you're trying to justify your obviously incorrect original statement by tying EVERY definition that I've used into it. According to you, if I say I like to watch basketball, but don't watch every single basketball game on TV, I'm a hypocrite.
You do realize how dumb that makes you look right? I mean, you probably don't, but everyone else in here does.
But anyways, keep trying to justify your original statement which was wholly incorrect, and I'll keep telling you to read a dictionary through your reps. Have a nice day!
Since we're on the topic of you not knowing what words mean, you might want to brush up on assault. There are a few US states where you logic almost holds true, but across most of the rest of the western world assault and aggression are pretty reasonable synonyms. For example, in the UK you can assault someone by sitting silently in a dark room two-hundred miles away. This holds true for the bulk of the US, Canada and most of the EU. Unless you're Scottish then odds are you're using words you don't understand.
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
Physical assault. My bad. Didn't specify.
UltimateHitman
Old School Legend
Ok, so what I'm seeing here is that you are simply going to "win" by repping me until I stop. Nice technique. Again, pretty lame.
And the basketball thing is totally irrelevant and different. Saying you like something isn't the same as having a strong conviction or belief about something. And watching basketball is not the same as calling homosexuals ******s. Nice try, but totally irrelevant.
Inaction is a form of hypocrisy, just as it is a form of cowardice or laziness. And I edited in your example of ignorance because I was writing and didn't see yours until I was finished so if it makes you feel better you can surely think that.
P.S. Dirty, I don't know what you're thinking, but my OP said GLAAD were hypocritical and I'm still saying that so I don't know how you think my opinion's changed. Sounds like the same viewpoint to me.
For the guru of the forums you do seem to get butthurt quite easily, btw.
Well that was easy. To add to the discussion of why GLADD are not hypocrites for not calling out TNA (which they are not, that assertion is laughable at best) I present an extract of the only public statement regarding professional wrestling GLADD has issued.
TNA is not marketed as PG entertainment.
TNA is not marketed towards children.
TNA does not have it's top faces spouting homophobic rhetoric.
One the subject, TNA actually devotes a portion of every show to a campaign in which faces and heels alike denounce bullying over such issues as sexual orientation.
There are plenty of reasons GLADD could have chosen for not calling out TNA, but of all the ones available I would imagine the one that actually explains the situation is that the TNA incidents never crossed their radar.
I mean seriously, there is a bit of a difference between the company's top star coming out week on week and making gay jokes, to an isolated indecent where one guy may have shouted the word '***' at another guy during a confused brawl.
Do you really not see the difference?
TNA is not marketed as PG entertainment.
TNA is not marketed towards children.
TNA does not have it's top faces spouting homophobic rhetoric.
One the subject, TNA actually devotes a portion of every show to a campaign in which faces and heels alike denounce bullying over such issues as sexual orientation.
There are plenty of reasons GLADD could have chosen for not calling out TNA, but of all the ones available I would imagine the one that actually explains the situation is that the TNA incidents never crossed their radar.
I mean seriously, there is a bit of a difference between the company's top star coming out week on week and making gay jokes, to an isolated indecent where one guy may have shouted the word '***' at another guy during a confused brawl.
Do you really not see the difference?
I won the moment you made a stupid comment, and then tried to defend it. It's one thing to say something silly, it's another to try and justify it. I don't care if you stop posting or not, I'm giving you red rep because that's what you do to idiotic posts.
It's irrelevant because it makes perfect sense in alignment with your argument, which shows how stupid your argument is. Fine, let's do it this way.
I'm a huge basketball fan, to the point where I dedicated ten years of my life around it. But I don't watch the NBA on TV, so according to you, I'm a hypocrite.
Is that example better? God, you're a dumbass.
So, according to you, the fact I don't watch basketball on TV makes me a hypocrite. How can you be the only one to not understand how stupid this sounds?
You're the one who got pissed because I called you stupid. I'm not butthurt at all and my feathers aren't ruffled, I'm just telling you how stupid you are. And it seems many people here agree.
He won't. Morons generally don't. But thanks for doing the research I should have done myself if I wasn't
