Previous  1  2  3  4

Nice try, Fiddle.

Go back and show me. Time to back up your comments with some facts.

To remind you the comment you made which I called you out on:



Just admit it. You jumped to conclusions based on your own bias and didn't even realize that you and I are standing on the same side of the fence on this topic.

   

For #2, does this include Fiddledouche when he made the comment about rental vans as it somehow relates to gun control while bodies lie freshly dead on Yonge St?

   

Less of a political hijack than just being a goof at an inappropriate moment. Fiddy wasn't serious with that one as opposed to Loreto who is entirely serious with her needless commentary.

   

Yes. That's fine.

But then there's the connected politics.

When Nora points to the "the maleness, the youthfulness and the whiteness of the victims" of the Humboldt tragedy she's preaching an agenda.

Ignoring that or her is precisely the wrong response to it. Examining it, noticing its ugliness and the stupidity of the agenda sparking it then applying thoughtful critique, followed by derisive laughter is the right response.

They did a good job of that on the Twitter line following her equally ugly tweet concerning the Toronto Van strategy. I posted that one.

Here it is again:

https://twitter.com/NoLore/status/988473245497200643

   

Exactly! I would point out that on Sep. 11 2001 a small town of 10,000 people in Newfoundland took 7,000 strangers into their community, and homes. Think about that that for a minute. A small town that was totally unprepared to accommodate a sudden increase of population that was 7/10ths of their own population, rose to the challenge and did just that. Were those 7,000 travelers all white males? Of course not! They were people from all over the world. Men and women of every race, creed and color were on those aircraft. Striking bus workers went back to their jobs to help out. Everyone got involved. A whole town got involved and went to work. They provided food and shelter free of charge. No one was turned away because of their gender or race. It is a lot easier to break out the checkbook and make a donation than it is to welcome complete strangers into your home.

Gander represents the true spirit of Canadians when it comes to helping out those in need. It was true 16 years ago, and its still true today! No amount of political correctness bullshit, radical leftwing agenda, or historical revisionism is going to change that. The travelers that landed in Gander know the true Canadian identity. They told their story to the rest of the world, the rest of the world knows the true Canadian identity. You may do a little regional fighting among yourselves (like the rest of us), but when the shit hits the fan, no one pulls together and helps their fellow man like Canadians. That is what happened in Gander and Humboldt. It is truly disgusting that anyone would want to belittle something that is so pure and good as the response to Humboldt.

   

She's definitely in the running for the Year's Worst Person award. She might even capable of beating Trump in that regard. Trump's just a moron and an asshole that acts the way he does on uncontained impulse. Loreto actually appears to be deliberately using her skills from her education to do this on purpose.

The most accurate and despair-inducing response to her tweet about Toronto was this one:

Pretty fucking depressing all around.

   

Over a trivial thing like a particular sport? Seriously? How is that the difference between making a death relatable or unrelatable?

That’s the part I don’t get.

I’ll offer another theory and this will also be my reply to Thanos’s post. Anyone remember a similar accident about 10 years ago in New Brunswick involving a high school basketball team? Not nearly the same amount of prolonged coverage and what did follow on focused mainly on the safety of so-called “15 passenger vans” like the one the team was riding in.

Perhaps the difference isn’t really about the type of sport after all but instead social media and its real-time delivery through smartphones, something that was in its infancy at the time of the Bathurst incident. Once a news story goes viral on social media, the mainstream media continues to cover the story, due to the perceived public interest, which in turn generates more social media, etc in a constant feedback loop. And I should clarify here that in our social media age, “the story” isn’t just about the facts of the tragedy, the “news” also includes how people are reacting. So there are newspaper articles about what people are tweeting about the tragey rather than the tragedy itself.

From the perspective of the social media user, they’re getting re-exposed to the same story and people’s reactions over and over - from the media and from all of their contacts- and even though it’s just the same story arriving through different channels, the deluge and repetition has more impact on you than a similar tragedy where you only read about it once or twice and then moved on.

And of course in the social media age people want to be part of the story. It’s not enough to commemorate a tragedy in private, people today feel the need to publicly post a picture of themselves commenting the tragedy - putting out the hockey sticks for example- so again that feeds the story.

And even if a person is not on social media, the people around the water cooler at work probably are and people are still hearing about it through the conventional media so this particular story gets elevated above other similar stories in people’s minds not because of the facts of the event but because it went viral.

So I think the above probably explains why reaction to certain tragedies today are so different from tragedies of say 10 years ago. As to why hockey team and not say badminton team: I think its a given to say that news and reactions to a tragedy in a community will quickly spread throughout that particular community- be it a sport or hobby or whatever and given the size of the hockey community, we’re just more likely to be inundated with the story and other people’s tweets about it. When it’s a badminton tragedy we might hear about it once, shake our head and then get on with our life, when it’s hockey perhaps we might do the same thing the first time we hear about it but then we continue to hear about it in the news and social media posts over and over and all the additional exposure changes how we perceive the event.

   

I had this argument with Bart already. It's not worth the time. They think he should have let himself be killed at 13 rather than accompany the person protecting him while he did shit for the nazis

   

Because virtually everyone in this country is/has played, or loves someone who is/has played. It's not that complicated. It hits home.

   

How about someone who has advocated the wholesale slaughter of men, women, and children based solely on them being darker complexioned and worshipping God on a different day. Sounds pretty Nazi-like and all you have to do is look at Bart's posting history to see it.

   

Because it's trivial to you, doesn't mean it's trivial to everyone else.

I suspect you don't belong to any clubs or associations and if you have children, they're likely too young to be involved in sports.

Any club or association brings with it a sense of community and the community feels that loss.

   

I understand about someone “losing one of their own “ If it was someone who was in the same club or league as me, someone I knew personally or saw around or had mutual connections sure because that something real in my world. But it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact we share similar interests it would be because I knew them on some level. If it’s a total stranger on the other side of the country the fact that they happen to like the same sport as me isn’t going to make an extra difference


And lets be clear here; it’s not just the hockey community reactiing, people with no connection to the community are too, my point is about those people. They’re not reacting to “losing one of their own”. They’re reacting to other people’s reactions.

   

Yep, a young teen. The happiest time of his life...danger, trust in his self, teenage foolishness. Still not seeing anything to indicate he was “a Nazi sympathizer.” Just some kid who got excited about living in dangerous times. And thanks for the brevity of that.

As to what this has to do with this stupid woman, hell, I don’t know. Jered brought it up in reference to ignoring her instead of telling her she should do whatever. I responded because you made a statement I found interesting. On checking I found his “ Nazi sympathizer thing was when he was a young teen. We don’t usually get too upset about teenagers and their thoughts, unless I guess we have our own agenda.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4