As far as I see, no one but you started taking about “Xtans” or whatnot, j_p_z.

Tigtog’s recent warning about prosecuting disputes across threads is salutary.

http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/03/31/creeping-pinkification-the-persistent-feminization-of-unisex-commodities/#comment-452161

Let’s try to avoid all the personal stuff, please.

I told you that MarkL comment was bad news.

Let’s see if we can’t start again tomorrow in more pleasant mode.

Hmm. That’s actually sort of interesting: I mean, the different ways that people can read someone’s ‘constructed’ online personality and its ostensible expressions. To me, this seems like one of the more fascinating illustrations of the so-called “intentional fallacy” that I’ve come across. (Not being sarcastic or aggro here, I mean it, really.)

Two points, but in reverse order, as it were: a) In reality (although really there’s no good reason anyone on this site woulda had to assume this), I wasn’t even capable of properly reading MarkL’s original comment as a “trashing of the PM’s wife,” since I couldn’t readily understand the allusions in that part, and also, Mr. Rudd (almost necessarily) just doesn’t show up on my personal radar as strongly as he would for your good selves — still less his esteemed spouse, still less the whole “NY stripper (non-)scandal” that this thing seems to reference. (Not that I give two shits about the fate of Eliot Spitzer, but his missteps in this regard make Mr. Rudd’s seem almost admirable by way of contrast) And b) although I do indeed find ongoing references here to Christianity as “Xanity” and its variants to be both bone-headed and wilfully obnoxious, nevertheless I don’t believe I’ve ever before given readers of this site cause to think that I am “obsessed” with the issue. I believe that would be what you fine folks call “drawing a long bow” (I like the imagery, I wish it were current in American-speak).

But since we’re on the topic: I am willing to bet good money (by which I no longer mean the American dollar!) that I am in a literal minority of people on this site who have actually attended Christian theology classes in which Our Lord Jesus Christ was normatively written about as ‘X’, and who knows what that actually stands for.

People who casually and ignorantly (and often, I think, maliciously) employ this usage in idiotic ways like “Xanity” should understand that they are actually combining two separate alphabets; and if they cannot state clearly why they are doing such an odd thing (and if they can’t even name the two alphabets), then it should be presumed that they are being deliberately insulting, and that they are malicious fucktards with an axe to grind.

Like this.

http://i7.tinypic.com/6o3f18y.jpg

Yes, it certainly wasn’t very Xtan of him. Thank Obama we’re all above gratuitously offensive schtick about all religions

JPZ, you’re so obsessed with this issue you have completely missed the truly vile aspect of MarkL’s comment, which was the trashing of the Prime Minister’s wife. Because of course, as everyone knows, women are to be judged only on what they look like and whether mindless sexist trolls find them f*ckable, even well into middle age. The fact that the woman is a millionaire in her own right and clearly a happy and clever person may explain some of MarkL’s bile, as envy is a popular motivator in the blogosphere.

This is what she looks like. Imagine what MarkL and his ilk would say if she were genuinely homely.

Not, I’m sure, that she would care. Which may be part of MarkL’s problem.

At the risk of taking this thread OT, would Kim care to elaborate on that comment? In my view, if the right to free speech is taken seriously it must include the right to offend for political reasons. Mark B has regaled us on this site in the past about singing along to triumphalist Red anthems about the bodies of class enemies hanging from lightpoles. I think that sort of speech is pretty vile but I would represent him for free in court if he were to be prosecuted for it.

Waiter! Bring me a custard pie! I feel the need to stick my own face in it, then shave!

Kim: “MarkL is just baiting us to see if someone will jump on his gratuitously offensive schtick.”

Yes, it certainly wasn’t very Xtan of him. Thank Obama we’re all above gratuitously offensive schtick about all religions, including Xtianty and its Xiam Myth. (And yes, I’m sure all you geniuses who employ this betarded usage are fully-accredited Xtan theologians, just innocently plying your trade.)

Never automatically ascribe to devious and cunning calculation what you can imagine instead an overworked subbie coming up with at the last minute.

My thoughts exactly!

And quite frankly I wish someone/anyone was running the world behind the scenes. The whole planet is turning into the new Heathrow T5 terminal writ large. Everything running well behind schedule, important baggage gone missing and frequent and incomprehensible announcements by those claiming to know what’s going on…

Mohammad H Pedophile!

MarkL is just baiting us to see if someone will jump on his gratuitously offensive schtick. Displaying about the same level of maturity as those idiots in Denmark. Free speech = the right to offend for political reasons? My ass.

And the standard of the MarkL comment shows no sign of improving.
Indeed, pretty ugly on various levels. There is a big whiff of very sour grapes emanating from Canberra.

The standard of his NY strippers has sure declined.

MarkL
Canberra