[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Withano

Christophobia and Indophobia are used to describe those things.

Gynophobia is a fear or dislike of women. Is that a made up word with no real meaning?

FINALLY i get diagnosed

in your face NHS

thankyou witharno

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Christophobia and Indophobia are used to describe those things.

Gynophobia is a fear or dislike of women. Is that a made up word with no real meaning?

If they are official words then so be it. Islamophobia was made up by the PC Brigade and not worth a jot.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

If they are official words then so be it. Islamophobia was made up by the PC Brigade and not worth a jot.

No, youre wrong again

In summary, youve spent a few years being angry over a word because you believed that people you disliked made it up.

[Vicky.]

Hmm. Bit of a stupid thing to do but it seems it was just a..snap judgement thing rather than intentional? Should have a bit more sense mind

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

No, youre wrong again

In summary, youve spent a few years being angry over a word because you believed that people you disliked made it up.

It is not a clinical diagnosis and has no such meaning. It is all grand-standing from the left.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

It is not a clinical diagnosis and has no such meaning. It is all grand-standing from the left.

Nobody (apart from you maybe) has ever said it was a clinical diagnosis.

The suffix ‘phobia’ loosely translates to ‘an aversion to’ if thats what you’re going on a tangent about. Nobody has ever been called homophobic for being petrified of gay men.

So new summary, you’ve spent a few years being angry over a word, because you gave the wrong definition to a word that you believed people you disliked created.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Nobody (apart from you maybe) has ever said it was a clinical diagnosis.

The suffix ‘phobia’ loosely translates to ‘an aversion to’ if thats what you’re going on a tangent about. Nobody has ever been called homophobic for being petrified of gay men.

So new summary, you’ve spent a few years being angry over a word, because you gave the wrong definition to a word that you believed people you disliked created.

I gave no wrong definition as that it is how it has been presented by the left. That is what the left wanted it to suggest and why they latched onto a word with the suffix ‘phobia’. It is still a made up word.

I thought this pertinent.

https://lawyerssecularsociety.wordpr...n-absurd-term/

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I gave no wrong definition as that it is how it has been presented by the left. That is what the left wanted it to suggest and why they latched onto a word with the suffix ‘phobia’. It is still a made up word.

I thought this pertinent.

https://lawyerssecularsociety.wordpr...n-absurd-term/

Nah, youre just being stubborn, I pretty explicitly explained how you misinterpreted it.

You want the word to have that definition so you can dismiss it every single time, and that’s why we’ve had this convo.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Nah, youre just being stubborn, I pretty explicitly explained how you misinterpreted it.

You want the word to have that definition so you can dismiss it every single time, and that’s why we’ve had this convo.

Have you read the link - it makes everything perfecting clear to those who will not see due to either irrational thought processes or hard-line agendas.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Have you read the link - it makes everything perfecting clear to those who will not see due to either irrational thought processes or hard-line agendas.

The author doesn't understand the word origin of the suffix ‘phobia’ either.

I haven’t explained to him how he was wrong, whats your excuse?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

The author doesn't understand the word origin of the suffix ‘phobia’ either.

I haven’t explained to him how he was wrong, whats your excuse?

Oh I think he does - he just has less of an agenda to ply.

I wonder who should I believe has more credibility when it comes to an opinion on this - this clearly educated, intelligent and informed man who has given a very clear description of the whys and where fore’s or Withano. A very hard decision indeed!

[Livia]

Khan signed off on a large inflatable baby with Trump's face on it to be flown outside Parliament while the leader of the free world visited. Childish and insulting, whatever you think of Trump. So really, he can hardly complain about this or he's going to look ridiculously duplicitous. And all the furore about the pig in connection with Islam... Please. It isn't a real pig, you know that, right? If they'd have thrown a pig's head at Khan I could understand the outrage. Instead, lots of non-Muslims are prepared to be outraged on Khan's behalf because it suits their agenda.

[Kizzy]

What would the pig signify though?... What is the connotation?
It's meant to be an insult and a nod to his religion ergo it is Islamophobic.
Nothing do do with Kahn as a person.

This 'signing off' issue has to be addressed... there is no reason whatsoever why it couldn't be signed off... it wasn't obstructive, or pornographic, it broke no law and was applied for via the correct procedure.

There would've been more of an issue should it not have been allowed as that would be against the democratic right to protest.

Yes I see some think it's childish and insulting and yet I have heard very childish and insulting comments from trump himself ... so why would anyone have to pander to someone who exhibits so little respect for so many people?

Kahn, should he have had the final say ( which I highly doubt) was right to allow the balloon it's a visual metaphor... many are aggrieved that the leader of the free world is so unstatesmanlike. trump politics are more alien here than any immigrant. Our PM has never taken to twitter in the early hours for a rant... refused to talk with members of the press at a press conference or made disparaging comments about other world leaders.

He may be an old man but he's a very young president... who has no idea how to conduct himself accordingly.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

Khan signed off on a large inflatable baby with Trump's face on it to be flown outside Parliament while the leader of the free world visited. Childish and insulting, whatever you think of Trump. So really, he can hardly complain about this or he's going to look ridiculously duplicitous. And all the furore about the pig in connection with Islam... Please. It isn't a real pig, you know that, right? If they'd have thrown a pig's head at Khan I could understand the outrage. Instead, lots of non-Muslims are prepared to be outraged on Khan's behalf because it suits their agenda.

I don't think it's comparable, if it was a mockup of a baby Khan in the similar vein as the Trump balloon then fair enough but the balloon in the picture is an attack on his religion, would you have honestly said the same thing if this was aimed at a jewish MP? That would have been just as much an anti-semitic attack as this is an islamophobic attack.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I don't think it's comparable, if it was a mockup of a baby Khan in the similar vein as the Trump balloon then fair enough but the balloon in the picture is an attack on his religion, would you have honestly said the same thing if this was aimed at a jewish MP? That would have been just as much an anti-semitic attack as this is an islamophobic attack.

Don't be silly... islamophobia does not exist! and for the context of antisemitism Muslims are not semites :/

[Northern Monkey]

‘Islamaphobia’ The UK’s new blasphemy law

[bots]

I still maintain the guy knew exactly what he was doing. But really, what has happened in the world when politicians are now seen as delicate little flowers that need to be protected.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Smithy

Why does he, Boris and trump all have the same terrible hair?

All that money and still crap hair