![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 26 to 50 of 66. Go back in thread:
Posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 12:08:14
In reply to Must we be 'protected' from everything? C'mon now, posted by sleepygirl2 on July 18, 2014, at 21:14:28
Yes you are so correct it's very annoying to subject some to things they may find distasteful. And especially one that is yes offensive to those of the Jewish Faith. On this I back up Lou l00%. Do you prefer large or small penis trees? Personally I don't have one. Phillipa
Posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 17:54:31
In reply to Re: Must we be 'protected' from everything? C'mon now » sleepygirl2, posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 12:08:14
I don't like penises in trees, I prefer the real kind. Lou is paranoid as hell, that's about him. All the website censorship in the world won't change that.
Posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 18:02:22
In reply to Re: Must we be 'protected' from everything? C'mon now, posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 17:54:31
So it's art. Would you prefer to have a pic of a real P*enis which I didn't asterick in previous post was in a hurry. Do you know for a fact that Lou is paranoid. I've written with him and he's logical and not paranoid at all. Phillipa
Posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 19:59:02
In reply to So it's Art? » sleepygirl2, posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 18:02:22
Enjoy
http://penisart.org
Posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 20:20:23
In reply to Re: So it's Art? » Phillipa, posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 19:59:02
Are you a fan of Miley Cyrus? She also referred to her style as art Phillipa
Posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 20:33:33
In reply to Re: So it's Art? » sleepygirl2, posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 20:20:23
Snarky much?
I just thought if you want to be offended we should go all out
Posted by Phillipa on July 19, 2014, at 21:01:01
In reply to Re: So it's Art? » Phillipa, posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 20:33:33
Takes a lot more to offend me remember I worked as a psych RN and also in a Jail
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 13:37:09
In reply to Re: Must we be 'protected' from everything? C'mon now, posted by sleepygirl2 on July 19, 2014, at 17:54:31
> I don't like penises in trees, I prefer the real kind. Lou is paranoid as hell, that's about him. All the website censorship in the world won't change that.
sleepygirl2,
You wrote, [...Lou is...].
What you wrote about me is false, and can induce hostile and disagreeable feelings toward me and decrease the respect , regard and confidence I which I am held, for I am not paranoid because I object to see a swastika displayed here by a psychiatrist that operates a mental-health forum for support and has strict rules to not allow anything that could lead one to feel put down or accused and to be sensitive to the feelings of others and not post language that could offend others. He also has a prohibition to me not to post anything about the regime that used the swastika. By posting a link that shows the swastika, that is something about that regime, for the prohibition is very broad as to not post {anything} concerning what the prohibition to me entails. The fact that I am objecting to Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record to continue to allow anti-Semitic statements to be seen as civil where they are posted, could lead me to think that there could be a reasonable basis for me to think that his posting of the swastika in the link could be in some way involved in our discussion between me and him by the fact that he will not delete the link per my objection to him posting the swastika in the link. For he knows that I am objecting to his allowing of the anti-Semitic statements to be seen as civil where they are originally posted. That is contrary to his own rule to not post anything that could lead one to feel that their faith is being put down, and the swastika can lead a subset of Jewish readers to feel that their faith is being disrespected. They could have a rational basis to think that because this is a mental health forum that has rules to protect readers from having their feelings hurt by the nature that Mr. Hsiung has a rule to be sensitive to the feelings of others and the swastika can be sickening when seen by Jewish people. It can remind them of the horrors that were symbolized by the swastika and Jews could think that the allowing of the swastika here could have a part in bringing back a resurgence of hatred toward the Jews. After all, readers can do what the they see the psychiatrist do.
There are symbols that can enflame the sensibilities of peoples that are symbols of racial hatred. The swastika is illegal to be displayed in some jurisdictions, of which this site can reach into the homes there.
The display of the swastika here by the psychiatrist can IMHO lead a subset of readers to kill themselves and/or commit mass-murder. This is because that subset of readers could be taking mind-altering drugs in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor that can induce suicidal and/or homicidal thoughts and think that the swastika is supportive by the psychiatrist, since he posted it and what goes here is supposed to be supportive and will be good for this community as a whole, according to Mr. Hsiung's thinking. So our young people that read here can be steered into thinking that the swastika is conducive to the civic harmony and welfare of the group here. It could be seen by our young people as being validated by the psychiatrist and also the members that do not post an objection to him posting the link with the swastika in it. And besides myself, just Phillipa posted an objection here. So these young people, and adults, could have hatred toward the Jews ratified for them to commit acts of hatred toward Jews in schools, shopping malls, and synagogues and at Jewish centers.
Someone said it,[...A picture is worth a thousand words...].
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 16:04:55
In reply to Lou's response-mnkyseemnkydu » sleepygirl2, posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 13:37:09
> > I don't like penises in trees, I prefer the real kind. Lou is paranoid as hell, that's about him. All the website censorship in the world won't change that.
>
> sleepygirl2,
> You wrote, [...Lou is...].
> What you wrote about me is false, and can induce hostile and disagreeable feelings toward me and decrease the respect , regard and confidence I which I am held, for I am not paranoid because I object to see a swastika displayed here by a psychiatrist that operates a mental-health forum for support and has strict rules to not allow anything that could lead one to feel put down or accused and to be sensitive to the feelings of others and not post language that could offend others. He also has a prohibition to me not to post anything about the regime that used the swastika. By posting a link that shows the swastika, that is something about that regime, for the prohibition is very broad as to not post {anything} concerning what the prohibition to me entails. The fact that I am objecting to Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record to continue to allow anti-Semitic statements to be seen as civil where they are posted, could lead me to think that there could be a reasonable basis for me to think that his posting of the swastika in the link could be in some way involved in our discussion between me and him by the fact that he will not delete the link per my objection to him posting the swastika in the link. For he knows that I am objecting to his allowing of the anti-Semitic statements to be seen as civil where they are originally posted. That is contrary to his own rule to not post anything that could lead one to feel that their faith is being put down, and the swastika can lead a subset of Jewish readers to feel that their faith is being disrespected. They could have a rational basis to think that because this is a mental health forum that has rules to protect readers from having their feelings hurt by the nature that Mr. Hsiung has a rule to be sensitive to the feelings of others and the swastika can be sickening when seen by Jewish people. It can remind them of the horrors that were symbolized by the swastika and Jews could think that the allowing of the swastika here could have a part in bringing back a resurgence of hatred toward the Jews. After all, readers can do what the they see the psychiatrist do.
> There are symbols that can enflame the sensibilities of peoples that are symbols of racial hatred. The swastika is illegal to be displayed in some jurisdictions, of which this site can reach into the homes there.
> The display of the swastika here by the psychiatrist can IMHO lead a subset of readers to kill themselves and/or commit mass-murder. This is because that subset of readers could be taking mind-altering drugs in collaboration with a psychiatrist/doctor that can induce suicidal and/or homicidal thoughts and think that the swastika is supportive by the psychiatrist, since he posted it and what goes here is supposed to be supportive and will be good for this community as a whole, according to Mr. Hsiung's thinking. So our young people that read here can be steered into thinking that the swastika is conducive to the civic harmony and welfare of the group here. It could be seen by our young people as being validated by the psychiatrist and also the members that do not post an objection to him posting the link with the swastika in it. And besides myself, just Phillipa posted an objection here. So these young people, and adults, could have hatred toward the Jews ratified for them to commit acts of hatred toward Jews in schools, shopping malls, and synagogues and at Jewish centers.
> Someone said it,[...A picture is worth a thousand words...].
> LouFriends,
It is written here,[...all the website...]
Putting the swastika on a website is illegal in many jurisdictions. The argument to allow it IMHO do not negate Mr. Hsiung's own rules here. The fact that it is recognized as that the swastika could be insensitive to the feelings of Jews could lead a subset of readers to think that Mr. Hsiung is disregarding his own rules to allow the swastika in the link to remain here. There is a rational basis for those to think that if they understand the laws of some countries concerning posting so a swastika shows. Here is a link to some of that thinking explained to you so that you could have a better understanding as to why a subset of readers could have a rational basis to think as to what is in discussion here.
Lou
To see this article:
A. Pull up Google
B. Type in, [ Brainz, is it illegal to display the swastika symbol ]
This usually comes up first.
Posted by Partlycloudy on July 20, 2014, at 16:10:05
In reply to Re: why I posted those links, posted by Dr. Bob on July 18, 2014, at 0:36:24
> > I don't understand why you would have linked to these pictures.
>
> PC asked what the picture was, so I posted links to a couple pages that identified it, showed the whole work, and discussed it.
>
> BobI think that any in depth discussion of art is going to have a component of interpretation; especially when images are shown in thumbnail and out of context (there's a familiar PsychoBabble theme). Links to the shows where the images originated from are more likely to include those that may be interpreted as obscene, again, without knowing the context or reasoning of the artist's intentions.
I find art to be so very interesting. Out of context, it can be really hard for me to grasp, not knowing the artist, or the meaning behind the image; particularly not being anything but a layman in my knowledge.
This is a chance, however, to be educated. If someone is offended by the larger context, then I agree a trigger warning is appropriate. Otherwise, I think it's fun and an opportunity to work my grey matter to its limits in unfamiliar directions. Also, if someone IS offended by anything about the links or art, I would advise to avoid the thread. This is what I have learned. If you are triggered in particular or find the link upsetting, perhaps it's appropriate to report the post.
That's my take, anyway.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 16:13:29
In reply to Re: why I posted those links, posted by Partlycloudy on July 20, 2014, at 16:10:05
> > > I don't understand why you would have linked to these pictures.
> >
> > PC asked what the picture was, so I posted links to a couple pages that identified it, showed the whole work, and discussed it.
> >
> > Bob
>
> I think that any in depth discussion of art is going to have a component of interpretation; especially when images are shown in thumbnail and out of context (there's a familiar PsychoBabble theme). Links to the shows where the images originated from are more likely to include those that may be interpreted as obscene, again, without knowing the context or reasoning of the artist's intentions.
>
> I find art to be so very interesting. Out of context, it can be really hard for me to grasp, not knowing the artist, or the meaning behind the image; particularly not being anything but a layman in my knowledge.
>
> This is a chance, however, to be educated. If someone is offended by the larger context, then I agree a trigger warning is appropriate. Otherwise, I think it's fun and an opportunity to work my grey matter to its limits in unfamiliar directions. Also, if someone IS offended by anything about the links or art, I would advise to avoid the thread. This is what I have learned. If you are triggered in particular or find the link upsetting, perhaps it's appropriate to report the post.
>
> That's my take, anyway.
>
>
PC,
Who would you report the post to?
Lou
Posted by Partlycloudy on July 20, 2014, at 17:12:40
In reply to Lou's request- reprtdhapoz » Partlycloudy, posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 16:13:29
I would use the report post button on the screen, and then I would not follow thread until I was satisfied my query had been answered. Whether or not it was in favour of my report (this is not my forum). If I wasn't happy with the answer, I would drop the issue and not read any more of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 17:19:17
In reply to Re: why I posted those links, posted by Partlycloudy on July 20, 2014, at 16:10:05
> > > I don't understand why you would have linked to these pictures.
> >
> > PC asked what the picture was, so I posted links to a couple pages that identified it, showed the whole work, and discussed it.
> >
> > Bob
>
> I think that any in depth discussion of art is going to have a component of interpretation; especially when images are shown in thumbnail and out of context (there's a familiar PsychoBabble theme). Links to the shows where the images originated from are more likely to include those that may be interpreted as obscene, again, without knowing the context or reasoning of the artist's intentions.
>
> I find art to be so very interesting. Out of context, it can be really hard for me to grasp, not knowing the artist, or the meaning behind the image; particularly not being anything but a layman in my knowledge.
>
> This is a chance, however, to be educated. If someone is offended by the larger context, then I agree a trigger warning is appropriate. Otherwise, I think it's fun and an opportunity to work my grey matter to its limits in unfamiliar directions. Also, if someone IS offended by anything about the links or art, I would advise to avoid the thread. This is what I have learned. If you are triggered in particular or find the link upsetting, perhaps it's appropriate to report the post.
>
> That's my take, anyway.
>
> PC,
You wrote,[...if anyone is offended...I would advise to avoid the thread...].
I disagree, for the TOS here could lead readers to believe that anything that could be offending is not to be posted because being supportive takes precedence according to Mr. Hsuing and what is not sanctioned is not against the rules and the TOS/FAQ states that posts that show what could be insensitive to the feelings of others is against the rules here by Mr. Hsiung.
If the swastika is allowed to be displayed, for any reason here, then what could be disrespectful to a subset of Jews is by the nature of Mr. Hsiung's TOS conducive to the civic harmony and welfare of this community in Mr. Hsiung's thinking. If that be the case, then could not all topics be allowed to be posted here including the foundation of Judaism as revealed to me? That is not permitted here on the basis that there could be readers that are polytheists, which restrains me from posting the foundation of Judaism as revealed to me according to Mr. Hsiung. To say that the swastika can be displayed here with impunity by the owner/operator of this site, which could be insensitive to Jews, and the foundation of Judaism as revealed to me can not be posted here because it could be insensitive to polytheists, sets up the thinking for a subset of readers that the policy is against the Jew because the swastika is allowed to be posted by the owner, but the foundation of Judaism is not allowed to be posted by me as a Jew here. Any policy that is against the Jews is by definition an anti-Semitic policy, just as a hotel had a policy against the Jews, the hotel could be deemed by a subset of people as to be an anti-Semitic hotel.
Lou
Posted by Partlycloudy on July 20, 2014, at 18:38:21
In reply to Lou's response-tupstan? » Partlycloudy, posted by Lou Pilder on July 20, 2014, at 17:19:17
Lou, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect that. I have no problems with the images or links that Dr Bob provided. I won't, therefore, participate in any part of this thread that is pursuing that avenue. That is your business, not mine.
I hope you respect my request to be left out of these discussions, as they are of no concern, personally, to me.
Thanks!
PC
Posted by Phillipa on July 20, 2014, at 20:39:53
In reply to Re: Lou's response-tupstan?, posted by Partlycloudy on July 20, 2014, at 18:38:21
Why would I ignore something that isn't allowed to be displayed lets say on the inside of a restaurant? I do feel My appetite which isn't good to begin with would be severely impaired with a picture of a P*nis Tree on the Wall, or the lady holding the two headed P*nis. How will this help me to understand art. As personally I don't consider this art. Seeing the picture of the Swastika reminds me of the owners of a diner in the City I'm from that survived a concentration camp. I will never forget the tattoo number on both the wife and husband's arm. Also brings back to me the Movie Sophies Choice. A Choice that no human being should ever have to make. Do I keep my Son or Daughter and sacrifice the other. So many ran out of the Theater in tears. I will never for get this. So if one is of the Jewish Faith and a family member was killed in a concentration camp. It could very rationally cause severe emotional damage to them. How horrible it all was. Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 21, 2014, at 1:13:07
In reply to Re: why I posted those links » Dr. Bob, posted by Phillipa on July 18, 2014, at 9:53:39
> Did you screen the pictures before posting the link.
No, I was focused on that one picture.
> I personally think it was okay if you had posted a name of the artist and let PC explore.
I agree, that would've been fine, and maybe even better. Sorry I upset you.
Bob
Posted by Phillipa on July 21, 2014, at 9:47:31
In reply to Re: why I posted those links, posted by Dr. Bob on July 21, 2014, at 1:13:07
Dr Bob if you had previewed that link of pictures before posting would you have still posted them? Thanks for answering this question as I understand you are sorry but I personally would review anything I were to post before posting. Thanks Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 22, 2014, at 3:00:17
In reply to Re: Is you had, posted by Phillipa on July 21, 2014, at 9:47:31
> Dr Bob if you had previewed that link of pictures before posting would you have still posted them?
Probably not.
Bob
Posted by Phillipa on July 22, 2014, at 20:47:47
In reply to Re: Is you had, posted by Dr. Bob on July 22, 2014, at 3:00:17
Are all the pictures from the same artist. I did not stay on this link long enough to read it. If not. Wouldn't it be better to just post a link to the artist the question was about. As that picture didn't resemble most of the other in the link. Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 22, 2014, at 23:37:57
In reply to Re: Is you had » Dr. Bob, posted by Phillipa on July 22, 2014, at 20:47:47
> Are all the pictures from the same artist. I did not stay on this link long enough to read it. If not. Wouldn't it be better to just post a link to the artist the question was about.
I think so, I didn't read it all. Yes, posting just the name of the artist might have been better.
Bob
Posted by Phillipa on July 23, 2014, at 9:39:19
In reply to Re: Is you had, posted by Dr. Bob on July 22, 2014, at 23:37:57
Why not just delete the link and post the artists name. Such a long time this has continued time to end the discussion isn't it and move on. I know you will do the proper thing thanks Phillipa
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 24, 2014, at 0:53:40
In reply to Re: Is you had » Dr. Bob, posted by Phillipa on July 23, 2014, at 9:39:19
> Why not just delete the link and post the artists name.
My policy is not to delete posts.
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 24, 2014, at 11:01:50
In reply to Re: Is you had, posted by Dr. Bob on July 24, 2014, at 0:53:40
> > Why not just delete the link and post the artists name.
>
> My policy is not to delete posts.
>
> BobMr. Hsiung,
You wrote, [...My policy is not to delete posts...].
Phillipa did not ask you to delete your post displaying the swastika and nudity. What she was asking for is for you to delete the link in the post with the picture of the swastika and the nudity. The difference is important to this discussion. Reasonable readers could think that what you are doing is to evade Phillipa's request to you. There is a rational basis for that thinking because you have changed what she said to you and that the past practice has been for you to delete links to anti-Semitic content and other offending content by using "xxxx" to replace a link.
I have the following concerns and if you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
True or False:
A. Phillipa deserves the respect of others here so that I will apologize to her for not answering her request to me by saying that I thought she said what she did not.
B. Phillipa's request to me has merit and I will follow my past practice and replace the URL of the link with "xxxx"
C. Lou, you are trying to protect Phillip's mental-health and the mission of the forum is for support of that. But it will be good for me and this community as a whole in my thinking, to not delete the link, so that replaces what could be a sound mental-health action by me here to delete the link.
Fill in if you are taking the position that you will not replace the link with "xxxx" and will be good for you and/or this community as a whole according to your thinking to leave it to stand:
D. Lou, the reason that it will be good for me and this community as a whole for me to leave the link to allow the swastika to be seen and the nudity, is because_______________________________
Lou Pilder
Posted by sleepygirl2 on July 25, 2014, at 20:22:35
In reply to Re: Is you had » Dr. Bob, posted by Phillipa on July 23, 2014, at 9:39:19
Posted by Partlycloudy on July 26, 2014, at 10:16:25
In reply to Real penis trees!, posted by sleepygirl2 on July 25, 2014, at 20:22:35
OMG, truly hilarious and they are what they say they are.
Well done.
pc
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.