Off Topic Vote - HIAG's best wum **** up

... so do you know for a fact that the poster that Skiddy's alleged comments were aimed at actually has that particular condition as you are now claiming ... if not, then I think you owe Skiddy an apology because that would then surely mean that his comments would fall under the same 'general analogy' context that you appear to be using to justify HIAGs comments / analogies i.e the ones that you have publicly stated you didn't find "particularly distasteful" ...

Oh .... lest I forget ... could you clarify what "particularly" means in this context ... still distasteful enough to warrant a ban? ... or only just distateful enough to be roundly condemned?

 

He'll be frantically using his toy R us dictionary on this post.

 

Yes, I do know it for a fact. Matth has repeatedly stated on this board that he has aspergers syndrome and on the exact thread that skiddy abused him over it matt had posted a video where he exclusively discusses his autism and his diagnosis on the spectrum. Do you really think that Skiddy had taken absolutely no notice of any of this and just happened to pick aspergers as an insult out of the sky only for it to be true ? If you look at the comment he made you can clearly see also that Skiddy was well within the knowledge that matt had aspergers

You are accusing me of deflection tactics and you are looking for the definition of the word 'particularly' ?. I've said I'm not answering anymore of your questions till you answer mine fosse

 

OK ... can you now produce a link to the post where Skiddy mocks Matth's condition... or quote the post itself ...

 

More fabrication Fosse, he's grasping at straws now. I've told him I'll rip him on my statement provided he answers the question first but somehow he's very reluctant to do this. Very strange!

 

Fosse, I've posted the quote about a hundred times now. I've said I won't answer anymore of your questions till you answer mine but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you are being reasonable and genuinely want to assess these disgusting comments

The dangling bollocks with Aspergers ? I've made my views clear about how I feel about this Fosse and I cannot see how it can be interpreted in any other way than to single out someone as having aspergers and demean them about it

What really has incensed me is the latter part where I get the strong indication that Skiddy is attributing the fact that Matt's aspergers has attributed to him being a ****. Now I understand that this is my own personal interpretation of the comment but the bit where he says he is a dangling bollocks with Aspergers is clear to see, as is its extremely nasty intent

 

Dog

 

Answer the question and I'll rip you its easy even with your amoeba type brain you can understand this surely?

 

Quiet, Dog

 

Petty insults keep coming!

 

****ing hell, I've only just seen this

 

... I suspect I wouldn't allude to Matth's condition myself in posts to him - but that's me... but Matth himself appears to be quite open about his autism .. frankly I would find Skiddy's remarks rather more distateful in the context of their delivery if he wasn't actually aware of Matth's condition ... as it stands, Matth appears to heve labelled Skiddy a cock, a not unusual labelling on these boards, and Skiddy has responded likening Matth to the testicles beneath said cock albeit a pair belonging to someone with the condition that Matth admits characterises his self ... I'm not sure that constitutes mockery of the condition in general as you seem to allude - it is specifically aimed at Matth who doesn't seem to take offence from it (presumably because he does not see it as an insult but just a factor of his life - that he has the condition that is) - he is likely more bothered at being labelled the testicles beneath Skiddy's cock.

Am I more 'outraged' by this than HIAG's suggestions that certain posters he has issues with exhibit autistic traits or other child affecting mental deficiencies or conditions? ... no in short. Personally I see more mockery in HIAG's comments because he would appear to be using those conditions wholly as a means of mocking and demeaning the posters he aims the comments at ... there is no factual link between those posters and the conditions alluded to.

My views are of course my own ... but would be no different if you changed HIAG's and Skiddy's names around in the posts in question.

 

I actually think that's very fair. Except I wholeheartedly disagree with the bit where you say that alluding to matt's aspergers in a tit for tat exchange does not constitute mockery. He's labelled him a bollocks with aspergers, for me I can only see nasty intent, why bring the Aspergers which you know he has in to it for God sake ?

But, as I've said you're entitled to your opinion as I am mine and I respect the fact that you've been able to approach this objectively and give what is I assume your genuine opinion. Fair play

 

Unbelievable.

 

Pull your head out of your backside, Bambi!

The fact of the matter is that both you and Pixie exhibit autistic behaviour. The only way in which I am denigrating autistic people (why do they have to be children?) is by my associating them with a couple of knob-jockeys like you and Pixie. For that, I apologise whole-heartedly to anyone who suffers with Autism.

 

He's scum, mate. It was only a matter of time before he showed his true colours.

 

priceless ... meltdown extraordinaire ... if you allude to "kid on the bus" I assume you are not meaning a young goat (that's why "they have to be children")... although in your world who knows for sure?

 

Part of the problem with this debate is the fact that that mental conditions are held against the people who have them in a bizarre way whereas physical conditions are not.
If I was to say that a poster wrote like he had a broken arm, this wouldn't be considered to be much of an attack on the poster, nor an attack on people with broken arms. It would just be odd. I suppose the problem with conditions like autism, aspergers etc is that it might genuinely be possible to diagnose them given enough written content, but it still shouldn't be considered insulting to say that someone appears to be autistic. We all have some degree of autism and its not a bad thing to be autistic.

 

Really! You wrote it you dopey bastard.

 

At last a sensible and intelligent post.