Bear_Tracks\Cantaloupe\Caribou - handicapped swine

[Mr. Bones]

Since when is animal a tribal term

[Ad Bot]

[Bear_Tracks]

Since when is animal a tribal term

I'm not quite sure. The fourth definition is more than fitting.

[kahnuu]

I forgot to add in: if you look closely, it is people like Foxscotch, Camel, and Maxwell (some of the BLF's more prominent wannabes/SJW's) who are more concerned about someone's phrasing/wording rather than the issue being discussed. I think you have it wrong.

What am I suppose to listen to? You call me a bunch of names for things you disagree with. If there is a disagreement with something I say, you are more than welcome to disagree, however I do not appreciate when you emit vulgarities toward me because of something I've said which you disagree on. 

If I see someone disagrees with me, that's fine. I respond to them in a respectful manner, and you should too.

[kahnuu]

I'm not quite sure. The fourth definition is more than fitting.

animals arent a race buddy

[Gytyyhgfffff]

bear tracks, nobody /ever/ refers to people like that, because another definition for animal (which is in your very own image by the way) is this

please

[Bear_Tracks]

This image has absolutely no relevance to this thread.

bear tracks, nobody /ever/ refers to people like that, because another definition for animal (which is in your very own image by the way) is this

please

Well maybe you've never heard anyone refer to a person who commits a violent/malicious act toward you, but I have. Stalin was an animal, Riddler was an animal, Hendrik Verwoerd (the man behind the implementation of South African Apartheid) was an animal, etc. There is nothing wrong with that wrong, and if anything you seem to be very concerned about that one word "animal".

I used it correctly, and in correct context. What is your problem?

[Bear_Tracks]

TYPO: Well maybe you've never heard anyone refer to a person who commits a violent/malicious act an animal*

[kanew2000]

bear is right, someone who does something that would be considered dehumanizing are often called animals
usually focused on people who commit crimes against humanity, i.e.

Stalin, Riddler, Hendrik Verwoerd

[kanew2000]

noedit: however they stole your loving bike not killed a man

[Bear_Tracks]

noedit: however they stole your loving bike not killed a man

They stole a bike which was worth a great sum of money. If you believe that $1500 is not a lot of money, that's fine - however I do because I'll always be $1500 short. What I mean is, yes I can make that money back - but I'll always have $1500 less than I did before.

It's like when I buy thirty shares of say IBM and lose 95% of the money I put in (say $15,000), no matter if I am able to make the losses back through working -- I'll always be $15000 less than where I was before.

[Gytyyhgfffff]

ok nvm about my post i thought you were talking about something else

[Gytyyhgfffff]

ok nvm about my post i thought you were talking about something else

no edit: i also thought that you were referring to this definition (and combined with me thinking you were talking about something else i got a little confused)

instead of the one that i linked, you might want to clarify that

it seems pretty just to call someone who stole your nice bike animals imo

[e-maxx]

They stole a bike which was worth a great sum of money. If you believe that $1500 is not a lot of money, that's fine - however I do because I'll always be $1500 short. What I mean is, yes I can make that money back - but I'll always have $1500 less than I did before.

It's like when I buy thirty shares of say IBM and lose 95% of the money I put in (say $15,000), no matter if I am able to make the losses back through working -- I'll always be $15000 less than where I was before.

But you're not out any money, you got it as a present

[Bear_Tracks]

But you're not out any money, you got it as a present

I was going to sell it either this month or next month, so I did lose money.

[Bear_Tracks]

EDIT: That could of been an extra $750-1000 in my savings.