commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
So its a crime to have a good time with your bros?
Bludgeon Inc Ltd's profile photoTrish Jarvis's profile photoMr Hot Salsa's profile photoEndoptic's profile photo
On that logic it would be fine to go around beating random people up with my friends for fun provided I was having a good time. Who cares who gets hurt as long as it's entertaining right?
How in the living fuck does singing drinking songs equate to physically hurting people? 
+Mr Hot Salsa Their actions on this bus are clearly causing other people on the bus emotional discomfort. The implication from your first comment is that this is fine because they are having a good time. Physically hurting someone causes them physical discomfort. Following your suggestion that having a good time justifies causing other people discomfort, it would therefore seem reasonable to physically attack someone provided the people doing the attacking were having a good time.

I don't think emotional pain and physical pain directly equate but I do think they are analogous.
+Mr Hot Salsa By your "logic" it would be fine to sing racist songs, as long as they amused you, in a bus full of non-whites?
+Bludgeon Inc Ltd
You realize that's general women logic now sans calling men that don't sing along misogynous then making the songs personal to those men and really meaning the threats?
+Neil Sadler Only one cunt was offended because she couldn't take a fucking joke. You fucking white knight faggot.
So if a group of friends and I thought it would be funny to go and punch someone in the face, that would be fine because it would just be a joke and if the person who got punched didn't like it they would just be a "cunt" who couldn't take a joke?
Want to have a go at responding to the argument this time rather than just swearing at me and calling me names?
+Neil Sadler
Why? You're clearly a moron if you can't differentiate chanting in public from assault. You have no argument or functional brains.
+Mr Hot Salsa Haha, calling other men 'faggots' and 'white knights' because they have the temerity to disagree with you!  Shaming tactics and misandry from so-called supporters of men's rights!  So hypocritical :o) 
+Endoptic First, I'm not talking about chanting in public in general, I'm talking about chanting in a misogynistic and sexist way in public. Second, I am not suggesting that assault and offensively chanting are the same, I'm arguing that they are analogous in the sense that they both cause harm to others (as I explained above). I'm questioning the coherence of the argument that something being considered funny is sufficient justification for causing harm to others in one instance but not in another. 

Maybe you'd like to take the time to explain why this kind of chanting is acceptable rather than just throwing insults at me?
+Neil Sadler
Don't need to. No harm was caused. You're still not getting pussy out of this, you know?
+Trish Jarvis
Just as it's not misogyny to call a whore a whore, it's not misandry to call a really stupid form of wannabe john a john. White knight is the lovely point between wannabe john and mark. Clearly, he should've define the terms of his service then made you an offer first. Instead, he's doing this shit in hopes you'll pay up anyway. Of course, he'd likely default to dildo, even then. Like I said, REALLY stupid form of wannabe john.
Add a comment...