Sorry, more meant that it seemed like you were ignoring or denying the fact that you'd called her a ****, not that you hadn't said both.
I'm not denying/ignoring that. If I was, I wouldn't be here right now. I wouldn't run away just because someone called me on something.
It's realistic enough to be a judge of what you or other people find attractive, and realistic enough to be comparable. For someone to so easily say things like that about a few small changes like this, you're honestly going to tell me you've never looked at real girls, whether right in front of you or in print somewhere, and said or thought what you just wrote now? If you want to talk about the character model, talk about the character model. If you're gonna start talking about what kind of women you do or don't like, do it without being so broadly insulting.
Excuse me? Well, I can see what you mean now. Your maturity is just boiling over. I'm not even sure how to respond to such a shallow, malicious, and completely ignorant retort. For starters, yes, I can honestly say, to my knowledge, have never called or thought a real human being to be a ****. The closest I've come to is when my friend Cassandra called some stupid girl a ****, I agreed, and that one "Emo Song" where the lyric goes something like "And their chicks look like dykes" I laughed and said something, more or less, to, "It's true."
Now, if we are done with the immaturity of bring my personal preferences and life into the matter, I will continue this debate.
Oh, and, also if someone is offended by me calling a character a **** because she is so close to realism that she can be comparable to real human beings, forget that. You deserve to be offended. Call me an *** if you will, that's just stupid.
And, by the way, you don't know anything about me, so I suggest you stop right where you are.
When you're speaking in public you pretty much have to take responsibility for what you say and what it could mean. Of course, nobody should really have to censor what they think beyond just being polite, but; Fact remains. You say what you said without denoting that it's opinion in any way, shape or form, and you're saying, "This is the way it is, and people who react otherwise are wrong or even sick." Whether they care or not, you've directed an insult at these folks.
And, for the third time, I shouldn't have to. ANd that is not what I said, now is it? That is how you intrepreted it. Do you dare say otherwise? Am I not right in thinking that? Thought so. Not everyone shares your mindset, and you are no mind reader. Stop pretending to be one.
By the way, go into any art college in the nation (or any other nation,) and critique a painting by saying the subject is 'an ugly ****,' without remorse, and the response ain't gonna be a-ok. You also don't have to call someone an ugly **** to point out they have a flat chest. (Why would you point it out? Who would care?)
*sigh* This is getting ridiculous. Do you re-read your posts? If so, do you cringe when doing so?
Refer to what I said to dynamic entry. I in no way, shape, or form am an art critic, never said I was, and never will be. Nor was my example with the Mona Lisa at all relevant to what you just said. And, as the frosting on the cake, I do not think she looks like a **** because she has small breasts, but, once more, more because of her face. What's with you and this breast issue?
And what's wrong with women with flat chests, anyway?
Nothing is wrong with women with flat chests. I can have the most fun in the world with a women with a flat chest. I just don't find them attractive, however, that is completely irrelevant to this debate. Do you want me to define irrelevant because you sure like to make such statements and points.
Sorry if I mistated. Nothing to do with the vulgarity (that just makes it more insulting,) but simply how strongly you stated your opinion and how you worded it. And yeah, like it or not, the way you said it implies it as fact.
Whether you like it or not, that's how you intrepreted it. That doesn't mean everyone intrepreted it like that, and, as I am the orignator of the comment, I can indeed tell you it is my opinion. You want to tell me otherwise? Are you going to argue that I don't know what I intended when writing that, or do you perphaps know my mind and intentions better than I?
Didn't think so.
I'm not interpreting anything you didn't type yourself, mate.
Really, now? If only words worked that way.
You don't have to put 'i think' or 'in my opinion' in every single thing you write, but if you want to speak english you're gonna have to learn to consider what you're insinuating and how much you need to define. The louder and flashier your statement, the more you're gonna hafta correct so people know you're not shooting them down with your words.
Then so be it. When that happens I'll deal with it like I am now; you're just stubborn.
It's not being 'politically correct' or any crap like that, it's the english language. You can't just get away with saying anything any way you want to without consequences.
Does putting words into people's mouths make you feel good?
I don't think it's about being politically correct, man. Just being politically incorrect means you say things that aren't so nice n' happy all the time. If you see a stocky woman walkin' down the street in army boots and a plaid shirt and say, "Man, she looks like a ****," without malice or anything, you're being politically incorrect. If you see a completely normal looking girl walking down the street who just isn't your type and you say, "Whoah, what an ugly ****!" then you're just being an ***. It's a pretty big division, and a lot of people try to get away with being jerks by saying, "Hey man, I'm not some P.C. lapdog."
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that, so I don't know how to respond, but if you are calling me a jerk, fine, you can think that, but you don't know me, and I can't tell you I'm not. Whether you choose to believe that or not is, well, your choice.
I can either be the nicest person you know or one of the biggest *******s you know, and so far you seem to be leaning toward the latter.
As long as you try not to offend people, though, you're trying at least, and that matters, man. Done is done.
I don't try to offend people, but I don't try not to. And should I happen to, I apologize, and deed is done. Done is done.
jeeze guys, he just called a fictional character a ****. no biggie. i've heard much worse. they're only words, and getting upset over them is imature.
Thank you.
we're on the smash bros forums!
if someone insults a character we like, we're entitled to get angry. being immature on these forums means making personal insults.
Bingo. Gotcha. Insulting a character is no personal insult, and how does that entitle you to be angry? It doesn't. Doesn't mean you won't get angry or shouldn't get angry, as a matter of fact, it will be natural to get angry, however, that does NOT mean you are entitled to, nor is it a personal insult.
@ kash
i was trting to dissuse the situation. i never called you an art critic or said you needed to apologise, i only said you should be more considerate of how others might react. and no you shouldnt HAVE to say IMO at the end of every statement that might piss some1 off, its just that if you do, you might prevent dumb arguments like this one.
I agree completely. Well said.
)
