Conquer Club

One Hand Clapper

What is the sound of one hand clapping?
When it claps bigotry at every perceived
Nuance or crescendo of social commentary
It sounds like a chat-sour.

When it claps in applause of
"Blue question marks" trollvertizing there
La Cosa Nostra/Thug life-style games
It sounds like a possible multi-sour.

When it claps in jealousy of
Kali, a goddess more then forty times
Her age, and forty times HOTTER+SEXIER+NSFW
It sounds like Conquered-sour grapes.
mod edit
When it claps in standing ovation of
Ego maniacal, self aggrandizing, bully pulpit,
Macarthyized, crimethinking, PMRC card carrying members
It smacks of sour-puss.

When it slaps me in the cheek,
Do I turn the other?
No. I'm not Jesus.
I AM.

What is the sound of one hand clapping?
Much Ado About Nothing
And close at hand
I suspect.

And if this is the sound of one hand clapping...

Before I start will I be accused if I post this.

Can you explain why an Indian woman depicting Kali, a Hindu goddess, is inappropriate and bigoted?

i had many reports of it offending people.

clapper011 wrote:i had many reports of it offending people.

So if I find your avatars offensive and degrading to women and enough people agree with me, does that mean you will remove your avatar Clapper?

clapper011 wrote:i had many reports of it offending people.

Yeah, that's believable.
So I take it that if someone somewhere is offended by something, regardless of rules, we're just going to take it down? I'll bet you that even if it's true that you had "many reports" of offended people, that a majority of people were not/are not offended by it. And, isn't it possible that the offended people are the bigots, rather than the person posting the picture?

"A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own"
DevilDuck doesn't display any bigotry by posting that picture. I think your offended people are the bigots perhaps.

Tripitaka wrote:So if I find your avatars offensive and degrading to women and enough people agree with me, does that mean you will remove your avatar Clapper?

And I agree, I think it's highly offensive for a mod on this site to have an avatar depicting the exploitation and objectification of women. I think it should be changed.

THIS IS A PICTURE OF HEIDI KLUM, SUPERMODEL, LOOKING HOT AND SEXY IN BLUE

And here is the story to back it up.
Heidi Klum's Halloween Bash
And a lesson on who Kali is.
And look at the wall, it says "Heidi Klum's Halloween Party". Now if I get a forum vacation for posting a picture of Heidi Klum, in the Hot and Sexy thread of all places, I think I'll have a rather valid complaint.

a.sub wrote:I reported it
u have a problem with that?
i happen to be a hindu, and when someone post a goddess in a degraded form* then i will post it as bigotry
not to mention the horrible placement of such a picture**

*the blood and gore was heavily unnecessary, if you google pictures of her they dont have bloody fingers and what not hanging down from her
**if i posted jesus*** on a stripper pole wouldnt that be degrading? i would think so. Same concept
***sorry to pick on him, but he is the most recognized god

Oh for chrissakes, get the sand out of your vagina. Flip out on Heidi Klum, not the guy who posted the picture.

ATTN: owenshooter, please bring back your pisschrist avatar.

BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA

here is the original image

well, that was off topic as jiminski said anyways......though it is probably nsfw, it certainly isnt hot or sexy...though I suppose some may find her so. No accounting for ones taste after all.

I'm really curious now. Someone should search through a.sub's posts to see if he ever defended the use of images of Muhammad, The Christ, Santa Claus, Zeus, Thor, or Batman anywhere else...

Cause seriously, if he's being hypocritical about this...


However, I do think that clapper made a really good call by splitting out this thread. Let's all try to keep the Hot + Sexy thread conventional, because if not, those wackjobs from the furry thread might show up and cause mass nausea.

pimpdave wrote:I'm really curious now. Someone should search through a.sub's posts to see if he ever defended the use of images of Muhammad, The Christ, Santa Claus, Zeus, Thor, or Batman anywhere else...

Cause seriously, if he's being hypocritical about this...


However, I do think that clapper made a really good call by splitting out this thread. Let's all try to keep the Hot + Sexy thread conventional, because if not, those wackjobs from the furry thread might show up and cause mass nausea.

this including yourself? as you posted a not so "nice" picture yourself...

Tripitaka wrote:

clapper011 wrote:i had many reports of it offending people.

So if I find your avatars offensive and degrading to women and enough people agree with me, does that mean you will remove your avatar Clapper?

as to this comment... trip you dont find that picture..now that it has been put back..offensive? please!

clapper011 wrote:

pimpdave wrote:I'm really curious now. Someone should search through a.sub's posts to see if he ever defended the use of images of Muhammad, The Christ, Santa Claus, Zeus, Thor, or Batman anywhere else...

Cause seriously, if he's being hypocritical about this...


However, I do think that clapper made a really good call by splitting out this thread. Let's all try to keep the Hot + Sexy thread conventional, because if not, those wackjobs from the furry thread might show up and cause mass nausea.

this including yourself? as you posted a not so "nice" picture yourself...

Yeah, I think it was a good move to take out the pic of the pisschrist I posted. It's really kind of the opposite of sexy, though that urine might be a bit warm...

I was just making a point, clapper. I'm not planning on going into that thread and posting every image lampooning religion I can find. I was trying to get a.sub to lighten up. By being as ornery and undiplomatic as possible. Come on, you know how I do, boo.

a.sub wrote:I reported it
u have a problem with that?
i happen to be a hindu, and when someone post a goddess in a degraded form* then i will post it as bigotry
not to mention the horrible placement of such a picture**

*the blood and gore was heavily unnecessary, if you google pictures of her they dont have bloody fingers and what not hanging down from her
**if i posted jesus*** on a stripper pole wouldnt that be degrading? i would think so. Same concept
***sorry to pick on him, but he is the most recognized god

I don't believe you for a second. This is Kali we're talking about.

clapper011 wrote:

Tripitaka wrote:

clapper011 wrote:i had many reports of it offending people.

So if I find your avatars offensive and degrading to women and enough people agree with me, does that mean you will remove your avatar Clapper?

as to this comment... trip you dont find that picture..now that it has been put back..offensive? please!

Ofcourse not. It's actually a pretty accurate depiction of Kali.

Wiki wrote:Kali is portrayed mostly in two forms: the popular four-armed form and the ten-armed Mahakali form. In both of her forms, she is described as being black in color but is most often depicted as blue in popular Indian art. Her eyes are described as red with intoxication and in absolute rage, her hair is shown disheveled, small fangs sometimes protrude out of her mouth and her tongue is lolling. She is often shown naked or just wearing a skirt made of human arms and a garland of human heads.

a.sub wrote:I reported it
u have a problem with that?
i happen to be a hindu, and when someone post a goddess in a degraded form* then i will post it as bigotry
not to mention the horrible placement of such a picture**

*the blood and gore was heavily unnecessary, if you google pictures of her they dont have bloody fingers and what not hanging down from her
**if i posted jesus*** on a stripper pole wouldnt that be degrading? i would think so. Same concept
***sorry to pick on him, but he is the most recognized god

Suck it up cupcake. Religion is to be kept in private. In public we all have to live with the fact that liberalism and the freedoms stemming from it will cause us, from time to time, to feel offended.

alstergren wrote:

a.sub wrote:I reported it
u have a problem with that?
i happen to be a hindu, and when someone post a goddess in a degraded form* then i will post it as bigotry
not to mention the horrible placement of such a picture**

*the blood and gore was heavily unnecessary, if you google pictures of her they dont have bloody fingers and what not hanging down from her
**if i posted jesus*** on a stripper pole wouldnt that be degrading? i would think so. Same concept
***sorry to pick on him, but he is the most recognized god

Suck it up cupcake. Religion is to be kept in private. In public we all have to live with the fact that liberalism and the freedoms stemming from it will cause us, from time to time, to feel offended.

All freedoms come with responsibilities and consequences. Someone has the freedom to post that picture. Understanding they have the responsibility on this site to not be intentionally offensive to someone else's religion, there are consequences for them going ahead and doing so. "Suck it up cupcake" is not an acceptable response.

Peacesful World by John Mellencamp

Come on baby take a ride with me
I'm up from indiana down to tennessee
Everything is cool as can be in a peaceful world


People know this world is a wreck
We're sick and tired of being politically correct
I see through it now but i didn't at first
The hipocrites made it worse and worse
Lookin down their noses at what people say
These are just words and words are okay
It's what you do and not what you say
If you're not part of the future then get out of the way

Come on baby take a ride with me
I'm up from indiana down to tennessee
Everything is cool as can be in a peaceful world

Hey yeah
Hey yeah
Hey yeah

Racism lives in the u.s.a.
Get hip to what martin luther did have to say
I don't want my kids being brought up this way
Hatred to each other is not okay
Well i'm not a preacher just a singer son
I can see more work to be done
It's what you do and not what you say
If you're not part of the future then get out of the way

Come on baby take a ride with me
I'm up from indiana down to tennessee
Everything is cool as can be in a peaceful world

Lay back the top and ride with me
I'm up from indiana down to tennessee
Everything is cool as can be
In a peaceful world

The money's good and the work's ok
Looks like everything is rolling our way
Til you gotta look the devil in the eye
You know that bastard's one big lie
So be careful with your heart and what you love
Make sure that it was sent from above
It's what you do and not what you say
If you're not part of the future then get out of the way

Come on baby take a ride with me
I'm up from indiana down to tennessee
Everything is cool as can be in a peaceful world

Lay back the top and ride with me
I'm up from indiana down to tennessee
Everything is cool as can be
In a peaceful world

Hey yeah
Hey yeah

Snorri1234 wrote:

clapper011 wrote:

Tripitaka wrote:

clapper011 wrote:i had many reports of it offending people.

So if I find your avatars offensive and degrading to women and enough people agree with me, does that mean you will remove your avatar Clapper?

as to this comment... trip you dont find that picture..now that it has been put back..offensive? please!

Ofcourse not. It's actually a pretty accurate depiction of Kali.

Wiki wrote:Kali is portrayed mostly in two forms: the popular four-armed form and the ten-armed Mahakali form. In both of her forms, she is described as being black in color but is most often depicted as blue in popular Indian art. Her eyes are described as red with intoxication and in absolute rage, her hair is shown disheveled, small fangs sometimes protrude out of her mouth and her tongue is lolling. She is often shown naked or just wearing a skirt made of human arms and a garland of human heads.

Seriously clapper (and a.sub) I really want to know whether you actually know anything about Kali or Hindu religion. You can't go and say that something is offensive to people from a certain religion if it is actually an accurate portrayal of that religion.

Seriously, would you ban an image of jesus hanging from the cross as offensive?

Hey, even Jon Stewart has interviewed her.

Woodruff wrote:All freedoms come with responsibilities and consequences. Someone has the freedom to post that picture. Understanding they have the responsibility on this site to not be intentionally offensive to someone else's religion, there are consequences for them going ahead and doing so. "Suck it up cupcake" is not an acceptable response.

Either you haven't been around long, or you haven't been paying attention. This has been forum dramatized well over in General Discussion, and the argument of offensive art does not hold up. There was no nudity in the photo, so they didn't break the rules.

And honestly, any "debate" about this is over. Snorri completely won the thread already.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

clapper011 wrote:

Tripitaka wrote:

clapper011 wrote:i had many reports of it offending people.

So if I find your avatars offensive and degrading to women and enough people agree with me, does that mean you will remove your avatar Clapper?

as to this comment... trip you dont find that picture..now that it has been put back..offensive? please!

Ofcourse not. It's actually a pretty accurate depiction of Kali.

Wiki wrote:Kali is portrayed mostly in two forms: the popular four-armed form and the ten-armed Mahakali form. In both of her forms, she is described as being black in color but is most often depicted as blue in popular Indian art. Her eyes are described as red with intoxication and in absolute rage, her hair is shown disheveled, small fangs sometimes protrude out of her mouth and her tongue is lolling. She is often shown naked or just wearing a skirt made of human arms and a garland of human heads.

Seriously clapper (and a.sub) I really want to know whether you actually know anything about Kali or Hindu religion. You can't go and say that something is offensive to people from a certain religion if it is actually an accurate portrayal of that religion.

Seriously, would you ban an image of jesus hanging from the cross as offensive?

She might if several pm her, stating that particular version was offensive.