Then one may ask Why you need to make up new meanings of made up words? ”Phobia” is a disorder. Why do you feel the need belittling those WHO suffer from it & take away their identity?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Acceptable insults
- Thread starter ric22
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I want to clarify that I suffer from anxiety and PTSD stemming from a traumatic car accident in my youth, which necessitates my daily use of Lexapro. I am not attempting to diminish anyone's experiences, and it's concerning that you may be trying to manipulate my comments into something they are not, a form of gaslighting. My usage of the term "partner" to describe my significant other has always been sincere and unrelated to any agenda.
If there is discomfort with LGBTQ+ individuals using the term "partner," that is a personal issue rather than a reflection of the validity of the term.
Regarding the direction of this conversation, it's important to remain focused on the original topic: homophobia. It seems there may be an attempt to steer this discussion towards political opinions, which is not the intended purpose of this thread. If political discourse is desired, I would encourage posting in the appropriate section dedicated to politics.
I've always been amazed at the double standards applied in this forum towards public figures and the forum members. If a public figure makes a mistake or an error of judgement, they can be insulted for doing so and no action taken against the forum member BUT when a forum member does the same thing, makes a mistake or an error of judgement, no one is allowed to say anything negative against them or the wrath of hell is brought down on them by the mods. There should no insulting of ANYONE regardless of who they are. Allowing some people to be insulted and not others just goes to show how things are wrong with moderation in here.
The original topic is "acceptable insults", which is an oxymoron, but the rules don't prohibit insults against public figures.
I think the above is a bunch of hyperbole. Those who gets their posts moderated when attempting to "right a wrong" are doing so against the rule-book so to speak. And you are correct, the potpourri of rules prohibit insults among others. People should figure out how to debate a post, not a poster, and reply in a way that is in line with the MacRumors rule book.
Even in real life there is a discrepancy between a public and private figures.
In my opinion there is more right with the moderation than wrong.
I respectfully choose to disengage from this discussion. It seems evident that our exchange has reached a standstill, with the prospect of further debate offering little potential for constructive outcomes. Acknowledging the constraints inherent in online communication and the persistence of differing viewpoints, I suggest that we mutually agree to respectfully disagree. I extend my best wishes for a pleasant day to you. If it brings you satisfaction, let's consider your viewpoint as prevailing in this debate. I honestly couldn't care less 🤷♂️
I think too many people put too much value/power into the words coming from another person. What exactly is an insult? For example, just the other day someone called me a “stupid old man”. Did their comment change my identity? No. Did their comment reduce my value as a human being? No. Did their comment remove my ability to obtain food, shelter, clothing, and electronic devices? No. Did their insult fulfill its intended purpose (to damage me with words)? Now, honestly, why would I allow that to happen?
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
Last edited:
Absolutely. "Remember, it is not enough to be hit or insulted to be harmed, you must believe that you are being harmed." -- Epictetus
It's good you have a mental framework to handle comments like that.
That said, there's no place for those types of comments here as it all it does is foster anger and polarization while adding nothing.
People need to be held to some standards of politeness and respect for others and calling you a "stupid old man" as that poster did .... does not meet that bar of required conduct here.
We can't have intelligent and respectful discourse on the forum if folks are allowed to just take low brow personal shots at others. I'm glad that is not allowed and is usually always correctly moderated away.
As I like to say, "comment about topics and what people say ... not about the people themselves"
Partner is an excellent word - to my mind - to use in a relationship (in the latter years of their lives, my parents - nice, middle class liberals - used it when introducing one another to third parties, sometimes, to the stupefaction of those individuals) as it denotes a degree of equality and respect in that relationship.
As for the topic of this particular thread, to my mind, there is no such thing as "an acceptable insult" and discussion and debate (irrespective of whether this is about individuals who live their lives in the public space, or sphere, or not) should not provide for a world where it is considered legitimate (and expected) to replace argument (reasoned or otherwise) with insult.
Personally, I deplore a world where insult has replaced debate or argument, - where corrosive contempt has replaced respect - and profoundly regret that tech platforms have created and enabled online worlds that allow (encourage and enable) members to post insults as that, quite clearly, is not only cathartic for some members, but also serves to increase and generate online traffic (and income).
My own (marked) preference would be for all expressions that come under the heading (or description) of "insults" (whether considered, or deemed, "acceptable" or not), to be absolutely prohibited.
At the very least, it would improve the tone (and content) of much of the online world.
Last edited:
I would say that the reason for this is that public figures are expected to be "players" and therefore a "counterintuitive" logic to the "insults" applies.
This I agree with.
Can someone please give me an example of an "acceptable" insult? What does that even mean? I would argue that all insults are unacceptable, whether directed at public figures or not.
Instead, you can use nice language to describe a wrongdoing, or (and most of the time, this is the better option), just don't say anything.
Public figures are not obligated in any way to withstand insults by anyone. I would argue that by being a public figure, that you might be exposing yourself to the possibility of insults, slander, etc., but that it should not automatically make that the case.
Is there seriously a contract or something saying "by being a public figure, you will be insulted"? What the heck?! I really don't think that exists.
Am I making sense?
I would say that you are still very young and really struggling with a concept of being a "player".
A TV show like "Two And A Half Men" has explained quite well why being called "a nice guy" is a "polite" insult. In a highly competitive environment nothing is what "it seems".
I guess it’s a chain reaction when we all start discussing the attitudes of posters. Always better to ignore the tone or report the post, or just address the post.
The entitlement of some, deep, it runs and it seems only some learn (slowly) with time-outs.
That post helped me block a lot of people. Never blocked anyone before, but many of those replies were impossible to ignore.
-bbd
The forum rules are meant to shield forum members from other forum members’ insults. Hence, the best way for a public figure to protect himself (or herself) from being insulted on this forum is to become a member (or memberess) of the forum.
Nope... still a public figure.
Hold on so your saying if a public figure was to join this forum and become a member, the rules on insults does not apply to them?. Can you please point me to the rule that allows this because I have just checked the support section and no where in the section on bannable offences 'Rule 1: Insults' does it state that this rule does not apply to public figures even if they become members of the site. 'Rule 8: Hate Speech and Group Slurs' only refers to political parties or members of political parties. No where in the rules does it state that public figures are fair game for insults, political figures yes but not public figures because remember a public figure can be a police officer, a judge, a council worker, a celebrity (actor, actress, singer, dancer etc).
While I wholeheartedly believe in a set of rules or guidelines to live by in this community I really don't want a 100 page document of legal-ese that can account for every last possibility.
I can't promise that I have never "insulted" a public figure here but I tend to agree with others that have expressed the desire for a more civilized forum. We cannot have any discussion on X or Tesla without immediate virtue signaling via vile insults and it is tiring. We would all do well to manage ourselves and hope that betters our forum.
I have to ask, then, how you feel about people including obscene insults aimed at public policy in their avatars. 😉
In the US, at least, the bar for defamation is much higher when targeting a public figure and for good reason— celebrity tends to bring an unearned halo of authority. Personally I try to differentiate between people who put themselves in the public eye (politicians, CEOs, YouTubers, etc) and those who find themselves there as a matter of circumstance.
Last edited:
First, I suppose, one would need to define obscene. Personally, I am not afraid of words, I do not believe in "curse" words. As an example: other terms for excrement... we have poop, a four letter word which some teach children to use. Then of course we have the other 4 letter word that begins with s and ends in t, this word some punish children for using, exactly why would we do that?
Second, can one really insult policy? That seems a stretch. I am simply expressing a strong disagreement while maintaining some civility... I didn't spell it out did I?
Your point is taken but in the end I'll defend my avatar with the reasoning above. Yes, I could have used something like a thumbs down emoji with DMA under it but that wouldn't be as playful which is how I view it. I have been using it for a while now and you are the first to suggest it is obscene.
Question...
Do you consider this common car graphic obscene? Or how about the abbreviation "AF"?
Last edited:
[I am not a Mod]
Insult Me, and I'll be right miffed.
Insult my Momma, and I'll definitely take Exception!