(13-05-2014 01:30 )hugh_g_rection Wrote: [ -> ]This is where I invite you to find any point in my previous post where I said you were 'wrong'. Best of luck x
... And where
I invite
you to find any point in
my previous post where I accused you directly.
(13-05-2014 14:55 )richpk Wrote: [ -> ]did i say you individually? no i'm talking about bigotry, not people that simply dont find someone attractive
i apologise if you think i was aiming that at you, i thought we were having a general discussion.
if i had something to say to an individual member i would have named them directly
Again, I didn't address any individual in my post. If you go back and read it I think you'll find I say 'the last few posts'.
(14-05-2014 00:13 )Addison Wrote: [ -> ]People who don't like the idea of war in principle will fight against those who prescribe and proscribe to excess, when the situation demands. It doesn't make them hypocrites. If you believe that discrimination is a bad thing, and that more choice on the shows is a good thing and that shemales deserve a place alongside (not in place of, alongside) the 'natural-born' performers on Thai Chat, you'd be being tacitly hypocritical if you didn't challenge the views of those trying to agitate in various ways to get them removed. How can anyone oppose the idea of greater variety and more equal opportunity for performers on these shows and not expect to be challenged?
If shemales featured on the majority of channels, those who dislike them (beyond simply ignoring them and changing channel) might have the basis for a legitimate beef; but as things stand they feature on only one, and so the complaints about them represent intolerance and a form of discrimination.
Addison, at what point during this discussion have I suggested the shemales should be removed from the channels? Or that they don't deserve a place alongside the natural born females?
This is
exactly what I'm talking about when I say people read into posts what they want to.
(14-05-2014 00:18 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]Addison, at what point during this discussion have I suggested the shemales should be removed from the channels? Or that they don't deserve a place alongside the natural born females?
So you want them to stay? You think they do deserve a place on the shows? Come on, help us by making clear your position!
(14-05-2014 00:31 )hugh_g_rection Wrote: [ -> ] (13-05-2014 01:06 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]Does no one see the hypocrisy in the last few posts!?
Easy...This bit.
no no no, its us surely lolololol
(14-05-2014 00:31 )hugh_g_rection Wrote: [ -> ] (13-05-2014 01:06 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]Does no one see the hypocrisy in the last few posts!?
Easy...This bit.
So me saying 'in the last few posts' is accusing you directly? You have a wonderful grasp of the English language, hugh
(14-05-2014 00:53 )Addison Wrote: [ -> ]So you want them to stay? You think they do deserve a place on the shows? Come on, help us by making clear your position!
Do I want them to stay? I can't answer this. I don't watch the shemales when they're on, so I simply have no preference regarding whether they stay or not.
Do I think they deserve a place on the show? Yes, of course. What grounds could I possibly have for saying otherwise? My only complaint would be if it meant sacrificing the natural-born women, which I feel sometimes happens. That in itself would be clear discrimination... or more accurately
positive discrimination.
as we are the people that wrote the last few posts before your comment then yes JuanKerr you are lol
you need to think about your own grasp of the English language
Haha. One of those 'last few posts' was my post! Please tell me this is some kind of fish or troll.
hugh, rich, you both have the intelligence of a cabbage.
How can you possibly know to whom I was referring, if I didn't specify?
You know what they say: takes a hypocrite to know a hypocrite. Still, anyone who claims they've never been hypocritical is being, well, hypocritical!
(14-05-2014 14:30 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]I don't watch the shemales when they're on, so I simply have no preference regarding whether they stay or not.
Do you want to have a look at that dictionary of yours to check what 'preference' and 'implicit' mean? A little past history:
(08-11-2013 15:10 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]they might as well just rename this channel SheMalesTV 
(14-11-2013 18:49 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]This 'new direction' wouldn't involve introducing even more shemales, would it?
(18-11-2013 21:46 )JuanKerr Wrote: [ -> ]I can't turn off quick enough when I check to see who's on and see it's a ladyboy double-bill. In fact, Ice literally was the only reason I watched. With her gone I don't even watch at all now.
(In case it's adduced as 'evidence' that more shemales/less natural-borns was officially in the offing, the middle one is a retort made in response to a reply of KalEl's in which he uses the phrase 'new direction' in a general and subjective way, not to an announcement made by anyone connected to the planning of the show, as far as I can tell).
See, what's implicit in the above quoted is the message: 'I'd prefer no shemales (i.e. 'I'd prefer it if they didn't stay,' 'staying,' to all intents and purposes in this instance, meaning: 'continuing to appear'). That established, props to you for keeping tabs on a show that you "don't even watch at all now" since your only 'reason' for doing so has 'literally' gone. Or is she back again? What's ironic here is that, despite what you've said, you probably watch the show much more than I do these days! (I said 'probably,' so you can stop waving your pen in the air).