littlefeltfangs: (Default)
Daniel Avery ([personal profile] littlefeltfangs) wrote2008-03-12 12:38 pm

WTF?!?

WTF for the only comment so far posted on this article.
The article itself is fairly bog-standard.
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] littlefeltfangs.livejournal.com 2008-03-12 02:31 pm (UTC)(link)
The thing is, this makes even less sense than the "LJ are owned by JEWS?!?!" comments a while back, as at least the person was making a point (no matter how stupid or bigoted it was).

This one is comes across as equivalent to the schoolyard "You're a gaylord!!!" type comment. Not only is it pointless, bigoted, and factually inaccurate, but it just has no logical connection to the article.

Unfortunately I think this is the bit that upsets me the most...
If your going to be a twat, at least be a literate twat.
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] littlefeltfangs.livejournal.com 2008-03-12 03:19 pm (UTC)(link)
I know. But my head needs semblance of logic!
Even the fundamentalist religious types with the screaming homophobia. At least I understand how they reached their conclusions, and have a basis for understanding what they are saying. Hell, if this had some context I might at least be able to slot the comment into a category of idiocy that I understand.

But I get the impression that the "writer" assumes that the context of his post is enough. It is a division that I've noticed within these sort of comments. At least when someone is being anti-gay they tend to include a context "this person is corrupting the moral fabric of my country and I don't want him turning my son into no faggot!" Apparently "But he's a Jew" is all the context we need, possibly because /everyone/ knows that this means he's going to immediately pass baby eating laws...
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] littlefeltfangs.livejournal.com 2008-03-12 03:57 pm (UTC)(link)
:D
That'd be me..