Myles' LGBTQIA+ thread

I just find it odd that you would promote a homosexual "pride" parade by highlighting homosexual child abuse.

I mean, if you take a step back, don't you think that it's odd yourself? 🤔
So all paedos are homos? Is that the argument?
 
Yeah its one of my "lets not cherry pick the data" pet peeves.
But that's what you do.

Take the John McGuirk thread recently (that we're both now banned from), I lost count of the number of "hard cases" you brought up. And also wanted to demonstrate that none of that actually means anything to you.
 
But that's what you do.

Take the John McGuirk thread recently (that we're both now banned from), I lost count of the number of "hard cases" you brought up. And also wanted to demonstrate that none of that actually means anything to you.
I just asked one question, repeatedly, that you refused to answer, despite having answered at least 3 variations of a question from you.

Would you like to address that question now?

If a child of Scottish parents, was born and grew up to adulthood in Ireland, would you consider him/her to be Irish?
 
I just asked one question, repeatedly, that you refused to answer, despite having answer at least 3 variations of a question from you.
I told you, I wasn't going to answer your question until you had fully answered mine.
 
Scroll down through the list at the bottom of the web page below. Examine their faces, and their crimes.


Read their faces. They were rarely gay. They were afraid of women. Like a lot of you on here. There's a big difference.

And then read the stories alongside to understand the interplay of the power and authority they were given, and expectations of "respectability", alongside the wretched institutional demands of celibacy etc.

Picture the places where they found their victims. The industrial schools, similar institutions, and Christian Brother schools.

Picture the surveillance and rules. The nature of those rules. Endless rules. The harshness. The removal of all agency from the boys. Often, the severing of contact with family or the manipulation of same, or the preying on those vulnerable or from difficult homes.

I don't know if you ever encountered the atmosphere of authority and obedience that underpinned the pre-Vatican Two system.

You were expected to obey, even if that be difficult and repugnant to your nature. There lay the root of the rot.

A system many of the usual suspects on here pine for to this day to their shame.

As for your protestations of just "ebophilia", well go down the above list again and read the entries very carefully. See the ages.

Finally do you actually know anything based in reality about the LGBT community beyond your own lurid imaginings?

Of course the answer is no.

But see where your sympathies lie. Actually these sympathies shine a damn good light on what you get so self righteously indignant about.

Wanker.
I'm not indignant. Almost everything you write is a strawman, do you realise that? I dont pine for anything - and i couldn't give a shite about your "community". I'm happy to live in and let live - unlike you lads who need to bombard the rest of us with your flags, Pride months, indoctrination in schools etc.

I just see through people like you. I know that your faux concern for victims of clerical abuse is just that - fake.
 
I'm not indignant. Almost everything you write is a strawman, do you realise that?
I've put it before that @Roc. can only deal with a caricature. He doesn't have the capacity to deal with what real people say and think.
 
They are equally Irish.
Alright then.

So you agree that the idea of being "more Irish" than someone else is bunkum? As John McGuirk said in the article and the idea of being Irish because of sporting achievement or having a job etc. is also bunkum?
 
Alright then.

So you agree that the idea of being "more Irish" than someone else is bunkum? As John McGuirk said in the article and the idea of being Irish because of sporting achievement or having a job etc. is also bunkum?
Thats not what he said. We established that already.

I answered your question.

Answer mine.
 
Thats not what he said. We established that already.
Read your post again -

I like the way McGuirk puts it:

"Nobody likes, or will ever like, the sad case in the corner attacking success. Ethnonationalism is an assault on fairness as well as logic: The idea that some layabout is “more Irish” than a successful athlete despite having contributed nothing to the nation, while the athlete he decries has contributed sporting success, strikes most people as a nonsense. A nonsense that’s the preserve of the entitled layabout, at that."

Do you have a job now, James?

Post in thread 'John McGuirk sacked/resigned as editor of Gript' https://www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.co...-resigned-as-editor-of-gript.1480/post-161774

It is absolutely undeniably true that McGuirk introduced the concept of being "more Irish".

I answered your question.

Answer mine.
 
Read your post again -

I like the way McGuirk puts it:

"Nobody likes, or will ever like, the sad case in the corner attacking success. Ethnonationalism is an assault on fairness as well as logic: The idea that some layabout is “more Irish” than a successful athlete despite having contributed nothing to the nation, while the athlete he decries has contributed sporting success, strikes most people as a nonsense. A nonsense that’s the preserve of the entitled layabout, at that."

Do you have a job now, James?

Post in thread 'John McGuirk sacked/resigned as editor of Gript' https://www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.co...-resigned-as-editor-of-gript.1480/post-161774

It is absolutely undeniably true that McGuirk introduced the concept of being "more Irish".
No. McGuirk is saying that racists are saying they are "more Irish". He's just reporting and commenting on how ridicoulus that is. Which you appear to agree with!

Look, I see you are following Rule 14 to the letter.

James, you are dishonest. But worse, you are obvious in your approach.

You are a racist.

But....do you want to be an effective racist?

Any one of us can coach you to be better in making your case.

The right approach here was to throw me a bone, answer the question in a way that makes me believe you are engaging in a "debate". Obviously you keep to your line but be subtle in the approach.

You need to give the other person the false belief they are getting somewhere. Instead, you are just using a slegehammer approach and this just pisses everyone off.

Keep the opposition engaged, dont turn them off.

Do you want to be someone in power at some point? To make decisions? Get things done? This isn't the way.

Change the rules.
 
Last edited:
No. McGuirk is saying that racists are saying they are "more Irish". He's just reporting and commenting on how ridicoulus that is. Which you appear to agree with!
A racist wouldn't say that an Irish person is more Irish than an African. They would simply say that an African isn't Irish.

No, I think that was more revealing of John's thoughts, and your own.

Look, I see you are following Rule 14 to the letter.

James, you are dishonest. But worse, you are obvious in your approach.

You are a racist.

But....do you want to be an effective racist?

Anyone one of us could coach you to be better in making your case.

The right approach here was to throw me a bone, answer the question in a way that makes me believe you are engaging in a "debate". Obviously you keep to your line but be subtle in the approach.
You need to give the other person the false belief they are getting somewhere. Instead, you are just using a slegehammer approach and this just pisses everyone off.

Do you want to be someone in power at some point? To make decisions? Get things done? This isn't the way.

Change the rules.
 
A racist wouldn't say that an Irish person is more Irish than an African. They would simply say that an African isn't Irish.

No, I think that was more revealing of John's thoughts, and your own.
As I said, you need help. Happy to give you tips.

Just to try to get you up to par.
 
As I said, you need help. Happy to give you tips.

Just to try to get you up to par.
Okay, now that I've hopefully revealed enough of the psychology of you and your fellow buffoon, John McGuirk, I will answer your question -

I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. It's you who needs the blindfold.
 
Okay, now that I've hopefully revealed enough of the psychology of you and your fellow buffoon, John McGuirk, I will answer your question -

I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. It's you who needs the blindfold.

"I wouldn't be able to tell the difference."

Exactly.

All we are, are brains, trying to talk to other brains. Our bodies are just biological machines, of different colours and sizes but aligning to the same form.

Culture is the difference. Our cultures have driven everything humans have ever done. And its not DNA driven.
 

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Back
Top Bottom