Twinkle Khanna calls Army man a troll; plays the woman-victim card - Page 7

I can't understand some people here. Same people find twinkle posts funny when she insults our customs and different people with the help of Oxford dictionary. But someone else who  countered her ignorance is suddenly a aggressive person? seriously🤡

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17_

People with a good grasp on the English language will understand exactly what he meant, and it's not what you think. 😆

No only people who take pleasure in seeing celebs getting abused will understand it the way you did.

No sane person will support these kinds of threats but yeah to each his own : we certainly don't share the same ethics.

By the way, I might not be as eloquent in English as other here because it's just my third language and I picked it up on my own but you're definitely not intimidating me. RTH expressed my thoughts better than me and it makes more sense to me than what you're trying to defend.

Originally posted by: Flame.

Well, then one needs better comprehension skills, because the context in which he is talking is pretty obvious from his FB post, unless one wants to deliberately come up with a different meaning. He was very clear in stating his intention i.e taking her to the court. The use of the idiom was made in this context. Yes, the idiom has two meanings and that is exactly why one needs to take the context into consideration. Twinkle made it an issue by misinterpreting it. 

Originally posted by: FuturePapa

Even some people with high end vocab are taking his words at face value. I feel me with poor English understood his point better. seriously  . astha I can't believe I m loving your posts lol

y should he apologise? it's a idiom and even in courts it will be proved that it's a idiom. If miss funnybones can't understand it, then its her problem. He doesn't need to apologise and i hope he won't! Because anyone with common sense can see that there was no threat! Edited by FuturePapa - 5 years ago

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Believe it or not, I had absolutely no idea that "give a bloody nose" was a figure of speech until this incident. I actually had to look it up and see its a figure of speech as well. 

So either my comprehension skills are poor or it could be regional/cultural language differences. 

You cannot always assume that people will get what you mean. Impact is different from intent. His intent may have just been to threaten a lawsuit. The impact, however, is Twinkle, me, and many other people intentionally/unintentionally misunderstood as a physical threat. If he is not a troll, he ought to apologize for the unintentional threat of violence and clarify that his intent was to protect the honor of a military uniform through legal means. 

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Believe it or not, I had absolutely no idea that "give a bloody nose" was a figure of speech until this incident. I actually had to look it up and see its a figure of speech as well. 

So either my comprehension skills are poor or it could be regional/cultural language differences. 

You cannot always assume that people will get what you mean. Impact is different from intent. His intent may have just been to threaten a lawsuit. The impact, however, is Twinkle, me, and many other people intentionally/unintentionally misunderstood as a physical threat. If he is not a troll, he ought to apologize for the unintentional threat of violence and clarify that his intent was to protect the honor of a military uniform through legal means. 

Originally posted by: astha36

That's why I doubted my own stance for a moment. 😆

Originally posted by: Flame.

I have no clue of what it is between the two. But, this was so funny to read that it actually made me laugh 😆

Edited by FuturePapa - 5 years ago

Originally posted by: Flame.

If Twinkle, you and others like you misunderstood his intent, then why does he need to apologise? Shouldn't it be the other way around? It's not his fault that Twinkle had no idea about the alternate meaning of the idiom. After threatening legal action, he used the figure of speech in the very next sentence as he knew it. To me, all of it looked like a man expressing his feelings about an issue he felt strongly for.

Edited by return_to_hades - 5 years ago