Having fun at a bar, DT style

[black_biff_stadler]

Is the NIN song title "Inside"? Anyway, I guess it just depends on the situation.  There's been plenty of times I've played non-mainstream songs on a juke.  If I'm in a bar, it's 95% because I'm trying to meet someone.  One more thing--my parents died before I hit 20 and just about all my friends that were married are now divorced--I'm quite fine with one (or two) night stands.

Well that's totally fine. Difference in opinions. I'm an avid beer collector so I've spent a lot of my adult life in bars so I've had the luxury of getting comfortable around the regulars in most cases so when I see a girl at a bar the "omg, a new chick!" factor's almost nonexistent since either I've already met them before or if they're new to me I don't place a premium on them since I know I'll be out in another night or two anyway with new opportunites.

[TheVoxyn]

Is the NIN song title "Inside"? Anyway, I guess it just depends on the situation.  There's been plenty of times I've played non-mainstream songs on a juke.  If I'm in a bar, it's 95% because I'm trying to meet someone.  One more thing--my parents died before I hit 20 and just about all my friends that were married are now divorced--I'm quite fine with one (or two) night stands.

It's 'Closer'  .

[TL]

Let me get this straight--you put more importance on listening to the type of music you like than to getting laid?

My friend, there is plenty of non-being-around-chicks time in which you can listen to whatever you want.  When in a group of people, such as a bar, some compromise has to be had.  Besides, there is nothing wrong with those three songs I listed.

Guyz, whin I go to da barz, I liek, toally get laid all teh time, lolz!

Seriously, grow the fuck up.

[black_biff_stadler]

Let me get this straight--you put more importance on listening to the type of music you like than to getting laid?

My friend, there is plenty of non-being-around-chicks time in which you can listen to whatever you want.  When in a group of people, such as a bar, some compromise has to be had.  Besides, there is nothing wrong with those three songs I listed.

Guyz, whin I go to da barz, I liek, toally get laid all teh time, lolz!

Seriously, grow the fuck up.

o/*

  For some reason I imagined your intentionally-misspelled post being spoken by Jim and Derek(Tim and Eric's newest show on Adult Swim)

[The Great Ape]

I do this all the time, just finished up at the bar and had the jukebox play "Home" while I was waiting to tab out

[hefdaddy42]

Why would you resurrect this old thread?

[Lonk]

That was an interesting read 

I played DT before at bars, usually on the shorter side of the spectrum though.

[pg1067]

Holy thread resurrection, Batman!

I will usually take advantage of the internet-based jukeboxes, but the tone of the now 13yo original post was interesting.  Why do it to annoy others, and why on Earth would anyone be proud of clearing "sluts" out of a bar?   

[Cool Chris]

...why on Earth would anyone be proud of clearing "sluts" out of a bar?   

I always was, but that was because I knew they were coming back to my place. 

[Stadler]

Holy thread resurrection, Batman!

I will usually take advantage of the internet-based jukeboxes, but the tone of the now 13yo original post was interesting.  Why do it to annoy others, and why on Earth would anyone be proud of clearing "sluts" out of a bar?   

See, that's me: asking why?  When I'm in a bar, isn't the point of music to bring everyone together?  We were at my local the other night (they have one of those TouchTunes things) and I played an Alice Cooper song and I had three people, including the bartender, come over and ask "did you play Alice?" and it was a good thing.  We all sort of had a moment, and it was fun.

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

so much for "only" keeping the sexism to the scenes in the hat thread...  some people here really hate women a lot and it shows

[Skeever]

so much for "only" keeping the sexism to the scenes in the hat thread...  some people here really hate women a lot and it shows

I think I know what you are saying and don't think it flies with the codes of conduct here but I don't think there's much moderation going on these days

Edit: also this thread is really freaking old

[hefdaddy42]

so much for "only" keeping the sexism to the scenes in the hat thread...  some people here really hate women a lot and it shows

That's not accurate.  For one thing, this thread is more than 10 years old, and social mores have changed a lot even in that seemingly short time.

Furthermore, you can't judge someone's character based on a couple of otherwise innocuous web posts.

Additionally, if you're talking about some of the posts of the last day or two, that are in reference to other posts that are a decade or more old, I can assure you that those posters don't "hate women" and the reason that I can assure you of that is because they've been members here for years and years and years, and I know them, at least as well as you can know anyone online.  You've only been here for five minutes, so frankly, you aren't qualified to make public judgements like the ones that you did.

So everyone, please be more aware of how certain language can come across, and also everyone, refrain from making blanket negative statements about people that you don't know.

Also, everyone, if you see a post that you think is a problem or breaks the forum rules, try reporting the post to the mods instead of attempting to save the world on your own.  That is not productive.

[Stadler]

 

[bosk1]

There's no "sexism" or "hating women" going on in this thread, so knock off the baseless accusations and baiting. 

[energythief]

The procession of sluts leaving was legendary

Holy incel energy, Batman

[PMSummer]

I get that the original topic is like way back from over ten years ago, but let's call a spade a spade. The stuff said in that post, yeah, it's sexist. It's never cool, no matter when it was posted.

[Jamesman42]

The procession of sluts leaving was legendary

Holy incel energy, Batman

I get that the original topic is like way back from over ten years ago, but let's call a spade a spade. The stuff said in that post, yeah, it's sexist. It's never cool, no matter when it was posted.

These are easy to say without backing it up. What part(s) are incel-energized or sexist to you two?

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

if that's a question you need to ask you were probably not paying much attention to the sexual harassment trainings they make you do at most jobs. this really isn't hard, folks.

[ProgMasterMind92]

why is ruining the night of a bunch of women having fun something to be praised and them liking bars and dance music worthy of calling them "a procession of sluts"...

my daughters don't like the same music or interests i do but i would hope they don't get shamed for it... i understand op didn't actually harass them and just did an embarrassing bit of grandstanding on an internet forum for a progressive metal forum after the fact but still

at least this thread is 13 years old... i hope the op has matured in the interim... but the fact people are defending the action and language used alike makes me unsurprised that i haven't seen many if any women here you all may think it harmless but it's not especially welcoming... i'm not trying to be an oversensitive cuck but i'm trying to think how my female relatives would feel

[Stadler]

if that's a question you need to ask you were probably not paying much attention to the sexual harassment trainings they make you do at most jobs. this really isn't hard, folks.

Please stop with the ad hominem.  If you have a case to make, make it.  The "you should know" is what people say when they can't make the argument themselves.  Yeah, I said that.  This notion that "offensive" should be universal and assumed is nonsense.

Yes, I understand - with the help of my wife, my daughter, and some of the intelligent, erudite women here - the sociology of this, and I understand how some of the comments play at multiple (and insidious) levels.  But just using the word "sluts" isn't, in and of itself, "offensive" to everyone as if it was a law.  Referencing having sex at a bar - assuming consent and a willful participant on the female side - isn't "offensive" to everyone as if it was a law.  For me, anyway (and this is difficult having two daughters), if a woman of sound and sober mind opts to have sex with a male at a bar, that's her perogative and I respect her decision with no judgement and no recrimination.  I know it's not always that clean and neat, but sometimes it is.

And if you read anything that was posted here, you'd know that most of those trainings are not only ineffective, but in many cases, counter-productive.  From the article: "The programs and procedures that the Supreme Court favored in 1998 amount to little more than managerial snake oil. They are doing more harm than good."  So if you're so worried about sexism (and you SHOULD be) I think a quiet thread in one small corner of the inter webs universe is probably not the best bang for our social consciousness buck.

[Stadler]

why is ruining the night of a bunch of women having fun something to be praised and them liking bars and dance music worthy of calling them "a procession of sluts"...

my daughters don't like the same music or interests i do but i would hope they don't get shamed for it... i understand op didn't actually harass them and just did an embarrassing bit of grandstanding on an internet forum for a progressive metal forum after the fact but still

at least this thread is 13 years old... i hope the op has matured in the interim... but the fact people are defending the action and language used alike makes me unsurprised that i haven't seen many if any women here you all may think it harmless but it's not especially welcoming... i'm not trying to be an oversensitive cuck but i'm trying to think how my female relatives would feel

But that's not what some people (those accusing of "sexism") are saying, and not what others (me, accused of defending sexists) are doing.  "Unwelcoming" is one thing; there's a lot "unwelcoming" here to specific people under specific circumstances.  One person loves to tell me to "fuck off" when he doesn't like my politics.  So be it.  It's another thing to be the forum police and try to decide how the rest of us should feel and react to a particular post or line of posts, especially when they are 10 or more years old.  We have moderators for that, and they have weighted in - UNEQUIVOCALLY - and made the call.  And yet some of you are still insistent that we should all be offended and put out as a matter of course.  I'm not at all defending what was written 10 years ago - I wouldn't have written it - but this notion that we should all follow in lock step with you because you are offended is not how some of us feel it should work. 

To wit, my daughter is not here - she likes her own music and we've written and talked about that a lot in other threads - but if she was, we would have a conversation about it.  She's in London now, at school, but if she was home, I might even bring this up and ask her opinion on it.  Perhaps she would have something insightful to say about the topic or the conclusions brought in here.  She's a 22 year old adult woman who is far more knowledgeable and aware of the delicacies of social politics than I am, and can decide for herself if she's offended or not.  There are plenty of women here who are not afraid to speak their mind and let their views be heard.  (A number, by the way, commensurate with what my experience is as an attendee at numerous (thought not as numerous as some) concerts of the bands celebrated in these pages).

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

i'm definitely not interested in a political argument. you should probably leave that in the proper forums (i think it's referred to p/r here but i also know you need to ask for permission so maybe you need to do that). but this isn't political. it's wrong to treat someone or a group of people with offensive language. again, it's very simple, and pretending this is a complex issue is merely purposely looking to muddy it so you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) can act under its cover

[Stadler]

i'm definitely not interested in a political argument. you should probably leave that in the proper forums (i think it's referred to p/r here but i also know you need to ask for permission so maybe you need to do that). but this isn't political. it's wrong to treat someone or a group of people with offensive language. again, it's very simple, and pretending this is a complex issue is merely purposely looking to muddy it so you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) can act under its cover

Of course it's wrong, at least for me.  But it's just not up to you (or me) to decide what that line is for everyone else. It actually can be complex, when you're dealing with other people's feelings.   

But look at your post:  you're telling me where to post.  You're telling me whether this is a political argument or not (it most certainly does have a political component).  You're telling me what I should view as "right" or "wrong".  You're telling me how I should view this as simple, not complex.  You're telling me that I'm acting purposefully.  You're telling me I'm muddying the waters for specific intent.  You're telling me I'm purposefully looking to act in a certain way.   YOU DO NOT GET TO TELL ME WHAT MY INTENT IS, or what my purpose is, and I can say this because you are patently wrong about most of what you're telling me is true. 

You're seemingly missing the point with my argument. It's not about sexism, it's not about supporting an agenda, or providing a fertile ground for inadvisable behavior.  It's very straightforward: you don't get to make these determinations for someone else.  It's not your call to tell another person what their intent is.  Offer the observation if you must, but that's where it has to end.

[The Great Ape]

I am sure the person who made that post using those words, which are kind of specific to a fratboy attitude of like 10+ years ago, would regret them if he saw them today...

As another person who has recently reformed their posting style and turned over a new leaf here, let's not go on any witch hunts. People can and do change 

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

i'm definitely not interested in a political argument. you should probably leave that in the proper forums (i think it's referred to p/r here but i also know you need to ask for permission so maybe you need to do that). but this isn't political. it's wrong to treat someone or a group of people with offensive language. again, it's very simple, and pretending this is a complex issue is merely purposely looking to muddy it so you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) can act under its cover

Of course it's wrong, at least for me.  But it's just not up to you (or me) to decide what that line is for everyone else. It actually can be complex, when you're dealing with other people's feelings.   

But look at your post:  you're telling me where to post.  You're telling me whether this is a political argument or not (it most certainly does have a political component).  You're telling me what I should view as "right" or "wrong".  You're telling me how I should view this as simple, not complex.  You're telling me that I'm acting purposefully.  You're telling me I'm muddying the waters for specific intent.  You're telling me I'm purposefully looking to act in a certain way.   YOU DO NOT GET TO TELL ME WHAT MY INTENT IS, or what my purpose is, and I can say this because you are patently wrong about most of what you're telling me is true. 

You're seemingly missing the point with my argument. It's not about sexism, it's not about supporting an agenda, or providing a fertile ground for inadvisable behavior.  It's very straightforward: you don't get to make these determinations for someone else.  It's not your call to tell another person what their intent is.  Offer the observation if you must, but that's where it has to end.

i'm not engaging with you anymore my guy. your need to have the last say is definitely amusing to witness though. you're even gonna respond to this i bet, lol. have a great day! 

[Stadler]

i'm definitely not interested in a political argument. you should probably leave that in the proper forums (i think it's referred to p/r here but i also know you need to ask for permission so maybe you need to do that). but this isn't political. it's wrong to treat someone or a group of people with offensive language. again, it's very simple, and pretending this is a complex issue is merely purposely looking to muddy it so you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) can act under its cover

Of course it's wrong, at least for me.  But it's just not up to you (or me) to decide what that line is for everyone else. It actually can be complex, when you're dealing with other people's feelings.   

But look at your post:  you're telling me where to post.  You're telling me whether this is a political argument or not (it most certainly does have a political component).  You're telling me what I should view as "right" or "wrong".  You're telling me how I should view this as simple, not complex.  You're telling me that I'm acting purposefully.  You're telling me I'm muddying the waters for specific intent.  You're telling me I'm purposefully looking to act in a certain way.   YOU DO NOT GET TO TELL ME WHAT MY INTENT IS, or what my purpose is, and I can say this because you are patently wrong about most of what you're telling me is true. 

You're seemingly missing the point with my argument. It's not about sexism, it's not about supporting an agenda, or providing a fertile ground for inadvisable behavior.  It's very straightforward: you don't get to make these determinations for someone else.  It's not your call to tell another person what their intent is.  Offer the observation if you must, but that's where it has to end.

i'm not engaging with you anymore my guy. your need to have the last say is definitely amusing to witness though. you're even gonna respond to this i bet, lol. have a great day! 

And I'm going to, if only to point out the fourth grade psychology and the seemingly fake cameraderie of the heart emoji.  I suppose you think you're playing chess with the "I lose if I respond and I lose if I don't" paradoxy.   I will note however, that you did not in any way respond with any substance, just more ad hominem, and that is telling.

[Metro]

I played DT at a Buffalo Wild Wings once and someone unplugged the machine

[Adami]

When I was much younger (like 20 or something maybe?) I went on a date with some girl I met on the internet. Not too long in the date (I'm driving her at this point) she starts going on and on about her recent ex-boyfriend and how amazing he is. Showing that she's clearly on this date as either a way to make him jealous, or as a distraction, or whatever and I know this isn't going anywhere. So I just put on the Instrumedly. Probably an immature way to "punish" her or to passive-aggressively express my frustration, but in that moment, to a dumb 20 year old, it felt like a win. At this point (20 or so years later) it's literally the only thing about the date I remember. No idea where we went or what she looked like or what she was like at all.

[Evermind]

or as a distractio

Was she Italian?

[Adami]

or as a distractio

Was she Italian?

Possibly. Kept talking about her big important brother in Tuscany.

[PMSummer]

i'm definitely not interested in a political argument. you should probably leave that in the proper forums (i think it's referred to p/r here but i also know you need to ask for permission so maybe you need to do that). but this isn't political. it's wrong to treat someone or a group of people with offensive language. again, it's very simple, and pretending this is a complex issue is merely purposely looking to muddy it so you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) can act under its cover

You're seemingly missing the point with my argument. It's not about sexism, it's not about supporting an agenda, or providing a fertile ground for inadvisable behavior.  It's very straightforward: you don't get to make these determinations for someone else.  It's not your call to tell another person what their intent is.  Offer the observation if you must, but that's where it has to end.

Don't you think there's a point that's far enough across the line where you in fact do get to call people out on it regardless of why they said it? What if it was slurs? A call to nuke the middle east? I'm obviously exaggerating here to make a point but for me and I guess for hoveringsojon - referring to a group of woman leaving as 'a procession of sluts' is across that line regardless of intent and personally I find it strange that anyone feels the need to defend that statement (or the 'right to' make that statement which you seem to be doing).

[pg1067]

I have a feeling I'll regret asking but WTF does "incel energy" mean?  I'm pretty sure I've never even heard the word, and it's got red squiggly lines under it.

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

i'm definitely not interested in a political argument. you should probably leave that in the proper forums (i think it's referred to p/r here but i also know you need to ask for permission so maybe you need to do that). but this isn't political. it's wrong to treat someone or a group of people with offensive language. again, it's very simple, and pretending this is a complex issue is merely purposely looking to muddy it so you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) can act under its cover

Of course it's wrong, at least for me.  But it's just not up to you (or me) to decide what that line is for everyone else. It actually can be complex, when you're dealing with other people's feelings.   

But look at your post:  you're telling me where to post.  You're telling me whether this is a political argument or not (it most certainly does have a political component).  You're telling me what I should view as "right" or "wrong".  You're telling me how I should view this as simple, not complex.  You're telling me that I'm acting purposefully.  You're telling me I'm muddying the waters for specific intent.  You're telling me I'm purposefully looking to act in a certain way.   YOU DO NOT GET TO TELL ME WHAT MY INTENT IS, or what my purpose is, and I can say this because you are patently wrong about most of what you're telling me is true. 

You're seemingly missing the point with my argument. It's not about sexism, it's not about supporting an agenda, or providing a fertile ground for inadvisable behavior.  It's very straightforward: you don't get to make these determinations for someone else.  It's not your call to tell another person what their intent is.  Offer the observation if you must, but that's where it has to end.

i'm not engaging with you anymore my guy. your need to have the last say is definitely amusing to witness though. you're even gonna respond to this i bet, lol. have a great day! 

And I'm going to, if only to point out the fourth grade psychology and the seemingly fake cameraderie of the heart emoji.  I suppose you think you're playing chess with the "I lose if I respond and I lose if I don't" paradoxy.   I will note however, that you did not in any way respond with any substance, just more ad hominem, and that is telling.

hey stadler, i wasn't gonna respond because it's becoming clear to me that we won't agree on this topic - but in light of your accusations of "ad hominem", something which i find pretty insulting considering i didn't actually do any ad hominem attacks, i decided to step away for a little while and cool off.

then - it hit me! maybe he doesn't know what ad hominem means! that wouldn't be his fault for using it incorrectly and in such an insulting manner, so i have decided to take the high road so to speak and try to offer some help

here is a link to the Texas State definition https://www.txst.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/Ad-Hominem.html

This fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, you irrelevantly attack the person or some aspect of the person who is making the argument. The fallacious attack can also be direct to membership in a group or institution.

Presumably, you thought my observation of you enjoying to have the last word was somehow an "ad hominem" attack. While i can definitely understand why you may have thought this, let me help clarify:

Simply pointing out behavior is not an attack, it is merely an observation. Since joining these boards about a month ago i have, on multiple occasions, noted that you enjoy having the final word. Me merely pointing that out was not "irrelevantly attacking you instead of addressing the point" I was making it clear that I was disengaging from the discussion. You could even say i was "giving it to you". I no longer wished to argue. On my way out of the discussion I merely observed what I have so many times before: that you love having the last say, and would likely do it in this case (i was proven right pretty quickly). Sorry to say that observations are not "attacks" and just because you don't like said observation doesn't mean you get to call it an attack. 



Just in case it wasn't clear, here are some more examples


NOT AD HOMINEM ATTACKS
- Stadler has an avatar of a muppet
- Stadler seems to enjoy having the last say in discussions
- Stadler is a father

AD HOMINEM ATTACKS (and to be clear, i am merely writing these out for explanation/examples sake: these thoughts and intentions are not serious):
- Stadler is a member of the silent generation, therefore his opinions on things taking place in this century are invalid
- Stadler clearly doesn't understand logistical nuance in discussion, and therefore his arguments hold less weight
- Stadler is a white man of privilege, and therefore his opinions about woman are mostly irrelevant or invalid


hope this helps clear things up for you! have a good one!

[hefdaddy42]

Oh wow