RE: The bastard should be hung drawn and quartered,

Are atrocities the solution to atrocities?

Is cruelty the solution to cruelty?

Is inhumanity the solution to inhumanity?

Or do we make some attempt to break the cycle of abuse?

RE: Do women really need feminism?

"Feminists aren't angry lesbians who hate men."

Firstly, the labelling: feminism is a political movement, or a perspective.

I have a femininist perspective, it's not all that I am. I don't feel the need to label myself as a feminist. Likewise, with the label "lesbian".

Secondly, some people may be angry, have s*xual relationships with women and hate men. It doesn't mean they can't have a femininist perspective and believe in equality. The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

I really dislike some people quite intensely, but I don't think they should have fewer human rights as a result.

The whole idea of feminism is that people may have the freedom to chose without the constraints of gender, or any other discrimination.

If I'm angry, that's my peckel to carry; if I want to have consensual s*xual relationships with men, women, or anybody else, that's my choice; if I hate a shed load of people I can if I want, as long as I don't impinge upon those people's well being, or equal rights.

Anyone can have a feminist perspective because feminism is about equal rights and equal rights means you get to choose without discriminatory constraints.

I think perhaps the angry, lesbian, man hater thing is a euphemism for female chauvinism. Euphemisms often don't offer much in the way of clarity. In this example, I'd say it was entirely counter productive to the concept of equal rights.

RE: Do women really need feminism?


I wonder if cause and correlation are getting muddled up here.

Is feminism the cause of the family unit breaking down?

Perhaps inequality is the cause of the family unit breaking down if women started to challenge traditional family roles, dynamics and behaviour.

Maybe feminism correlates with the movement to challenge the inequalities of the family unit, given its a movement to challenge inequalities.

If one of those inequalities is that women are still viewed in law as being the natural primary carers of children, then feminism, the movement for equal rights for women, is surely the obvious solution to redressing the balance when it comes to gender discrimination within parental rights.

I've said it already, one of the problems is people viewing feminism as a threat and that they might lose out.

I'm sorry, but I think men are being a bit dull if they can't think up an effective way of arguing from a feminist perspective to achieve equal rights for themselves. hmmm

RE: Do women really need feminism?

Treating people equally is not the same as treating everyone the same.

If I make everyone a size 12 frock, very few people will have a suitable item of clothing. I've treated everyone the same, but to treat everyone equally I would have to make everyone an item of clothing which suits their individual needs.

One issue with treating everyone equally is that it takes more time and effort. Another is that some people think they might lose out and can't see the advantages for themselves.

The same/equal argument works similarly with cat calling - it doesn't suit some people. It tends to not to suit a lot of women for a number of reasons and the social ramifications are broad.

If it tends to suit some men, it doesn't mean it's socially acceptable to treat everyone the same.

The trouble is, when you're yelling at randomers, there's not much scope for ascertaining the recipient's individual needs, in which case it's perhaps best to keep your gob shut.

RE: Would you EAT your own PLACENTA if it benefited the baby?

A couple from the NCT classes my daughter and I attended made a pate from the placenta.

I think they were hoping for foie gras, but ended up with Tesco Value Range pate. laugh

The best placenta story I heard was from our NCT teacher who is a personal friend. Apparently, one woman kept the placentas of all three of her children in the freezer, for some reason, not wanting to part with them.

Her property was broken into one night and the thieves got away with the entire contents of her chest freezer...

RE: Do women really need feminism?

How can women be saying they are victims if they need feminism, if men (and all people) have the right to equality, too?

If feminism is the political movement for equal rights for women and you can't have equal rights for women without having equal rights for everybody else, then feminism is the political movement for equal rights for everybody.

If needing feminism is saying that women are victims, then it's saying that everybody is a victim, otherwise it would be unequal.

One could argue that everybody is a victim of inequality, and that maybe true in different ways for different people, but maybe suppressive techniques such as name calling isn't really the best way forward to reduce oppression, eh? laugh

RE: Have you ever answered a toy phone?

Fairly regularly and it's always granddaughter calling me, or one of the unicorns.

It's much like chatting on the forums. giggle

RE: Do u really want to meet someone on cs - or r u just leading them on - for a good laugh ?

If I'm analytically superior because I can read the options under the 'seeking relationship' part of the profile set up, you're in trouble, Snooks. laugh

RE: Gender neutral public restrooms

Well, I should have read more of the thread before posting, but I took a few days to think it over, too.

And then I had my post all written and waiting and no signal.

I did kinda wonder at the strangeness of a security guard in a restroom, but I also wonder at the strangeness of American culture and thought the two things might be linked in some way. blushing giggle

RE: Gender neutral public restrooms

The situation you describe appears different than the one you state.

A lavatory which anyone can use is like a bathroom in a house. You only need one for everyone and there's some way to maintain privacy, like a lock on the door.

Maybe I've got it all wrong, but what you appear to be describing is that the security guard didn't make his presence known by the time your hem was over you knee and didn't look away because he saw your rabbit/headlight face.

The problem isn't gender neutral restrooms. Privacy can be arranged. Personally, I like privacy and don't like using communal women's facilities. I find peeing in company a tricky little maneuver and so tend to use the gender neutral disabled toilets.

The problem appears to be that some f*ck thought it was a good idea to arrange for a pervert to stand guard in case of perverts.

If you were British, you might have written a letter by now.

And copied in a relevant authority.

RE: Do u really want to meet someone on cs - or r u just leading them on - for a good laugh ?

Are those the only two options that you can think of?

People on CS are either looking to meet someone, or they are leading someone on for a laugh.

Maybe CS is a social site, not a logic gate.

RE: Women who are into Black men ( Thread )

I'm still trying to work out the link between the original post and the thread title. confused

But thanks for letting us know that it's a thread, in the thread title. I might have otherwise missed that. thumbs up

RE: Now is the time to confess!

Good/naughty list...?

Bring the man/woman of my dreams...?

Is this a thread about persuading Santa to have a threesome? shock

Blimey, I was only going to ask for some new walking socks and a couple of books. dunno

RE: man makeup

Never seen a straight man wearing make-up, Molly...?

Bloody Nora, Wales is suddenly looking modern and progressive. laugh

Personally, I don't like seeing anyone caked with make-up, unless they're using their face as a canvas and can do that artistically.

I kinda think it's a shame that men are being dragged into the fashion/body culture/big business thing and I would rather have seen it go the other way towards more personal creativity.

Having said that, if the personal creativity involves a bit of face painting, I don't see why that would have to be gender exclusive.

RE: God like status.

And I was using those same terms to make my point.

My point was that anyone with status who uses it to their advantage is selling themselves on an image which has been created. Only if we believe that created image do we make them what they are, or more than what they are.

I work in a university. A lot of people there have the potential to glean benefits from their social status. Some revel in their power and ponce about in their self importance, some are just scruffy gits who believe in what they do and like their jobs.

Guess which ones are more competent at what they do and deserve a bit of credit?

RE: Do we ever change really.


As a small child I was a watcher and a thinker. I would see things I thought were hypocritical, contradictory, illogical, non-sensical (but, hey, I went to a Catholic school.) Despite a child's tendency to internalise, I would sometimes, or perhaps often think that adults were basically unhinged. For the most part I was too shy to say anything, or challenge the stuff I saw going on around me.

I'm still fundamentally shy, but I have personally developed since then. I'm still an observer and thinker. I still see contradictory, illogical and non-sensical things.

The difference is, I now open my gob and let it all fall out.

The result is I've become a bit militant in an area of my life. I've surprised myself. I've grown and changed a lot.

But the potential has always been there. The seeds were sown a long time ago.

We do change. I'm a great advocate of change. But we also stay the same. These things aren't mutually exclusive.

RE: God like status.

"Serve our country, protect our lives...freedom"

Might I suggest these are false premises?

How did they come about?

If your argument was premised with "Serve themselves, protect themselves...restrict our freedoms", would the conclusion still be that they are God's and untouchable?

I ask again, where does the idea come from that people with high status positions serve our country, protect our lives and freedom?

RE: Don't do me any favours!!

Y'know that brewer's droop thing?

I get the equivalent of that when I'm pissed off.

I may have been accused of using sex as a weapon, but I was probably just not turned on by somebody's behaviour.

The thing about accusing women of using sex as a weapon is that men don't have to examine, or take responsibility for their own behaviour.

If men want to blame women, go ahead if it makes you feel better, but bear in mind, it's likely to result in more pissed off turn off.


RE: Do we ever change really.

Our formative years (up to the age of 7) are called formative for a reason.

It's the time period where we cognitively develop in certain critical ways, such that our core self becomes fixed in certain ways. That doesn't mean we stop developing and it's not to be confused with how circumstances can effect our emotions.

Say two children experience a trauma, maybe they experience homelessness. One child may develop from that experience believing that no child should go through that and they develop a tendency to look after vulnerable others. The other child learns how to survive and look after themselves.

Why does one child develop one way and not the other? Maybe it's external influences, their role models, or internal influences such as their capacity to empathise.

Now, say the child with the tendency to look after others becomes hurt, or burned out, or disappointed in some way as an adult. They may get angry, decide to go and buy a vat of ice-cream just for themselves, swear blind they don't give a f*ck about anyone else, blah, blah, blah. It may appear on the surface that they have changed radically, but really their emotions have changed, not their 'personality'. A period of rest and self- nurture, some grieving, resolving issues and working through their stuff and they're back on an even keel, even if that takes a while. Maybe they are a bit different as a result of their new experiences, but still basically the same.

The child who looks after number one may have some altruistic moments, but ultimately will always retreat to survival mode, especially when in stressful situations. Rarely do people have Scrooge-like epiphanies and become so altered in personality.

People don't really have fundamental personality changes unless they experience neurological damage, such as might be the result of a stroke, or physical injury.

Our formative years map the rest of our lives.

RE: There's A Killer On The Road

The necrophilia, sadism and insanity diagnoses seem to be reported primarily, and yet lack of empathy, lack of remorse and manipulative behaviour seem more salient features of Saito's make up to me.

It's less surprising that he had s*xual relations with staff, married a hospital worker, had help to escape and all manner of inappropriate freedoms if he is thought of in terms of (What used to be called) psychopathy.

What is surprising is that he was left in the care of susceptible staff.

Surely, after the first indications of his capabilities, he should have been the responsibility of more knowledgeable and less easily manipulated staff.

RE: behavior

Well, that makes my spelling and grammar posts look a bit less epiphanous than I'd hoped.

RE: behavior

f*ck! How did that 'and' get in there?

Get thee behind me, predictive text!

RE: behavior

I like t o think the letter 'u' and is my saviour.

All those who commit the sin of letter 'u' sloth are damned to everlasting writing the correct spelling out three times.

RE: If you 100% knew there is a God

It would depend upon what the rules were.

Sensible rules I would stick to like glue, say, thou shallt not swap the blood type labels aroundeth.

Stupid rules are there to be broken, say, thou shallt not have access to the numerical records thouest needs for thy legal documents because I am the Almighty; thou shallt have a feel and recordeth a guess.

And then there's the contradictory rules, say, thou shallt not carry thy mobile phone on thy person in case thy dropeth a text, followed by thou must carryeth thy mobile phone at all times for security of thine own person.

Y'know, I think I might be able to work out for myself how to behave as long as God provides the information I need to maketh sensible choices.

RE: There's A Killer On The Road


I think the insanity diagnosis was on the wrong body. shock

RE: There's A Killer On The Road

Somebody deemed not guilty of a horrific murder on the grounds of insanity (where presumably it was unequivocally demonstrated that he did not know his acts were wrong), leaves the presumably high security institution where he was being held, gets on to two planes, which would presumably involve at least finances, if not ID, and gets through airport security in California to freedom before anyone is any the wiser.

Presumably, all known sources of finance and ID would have been secured and this man's birth certificate, driver's licence, passport and bank card weren't kept in the top draw of the games room along with the Scrabble.

If he had a secret stash prior to being caught, wouldn't that imply knowledge of wrong doing and call into question the insanity diagnosis?

If he had help, wouldn't that call into question the security of the institution where he was being held? How about the insanity diagnosis if deception was involved?

If he escaped and then gathered the means to travel, that would perhaps put into question the institution's security, but how about the insanity diagnosis? A certain amount of deception must have been involved which would imply an understanding of wrong doing.

If he got through airport security by deception, wouldn't that put into question airport security and the insanity diagnosis? Or if there was somehow no deception, what happened with airport security?

Did he manage to do all this before anyone noticed he was missing? In which case was it a lackadaisical approach to security at the institution, or was there deception involved?

Was he noted as missing, but there was a communication failure in getting airport

It strikes me there must have been a series of failures for this to happen. If the insanity diagnosis was one of those failures, is it possible that the institution where he was being held simply wasn't equipped, at least with the correct information about this man, but possibly with the appropriate infrastructure, to hold him securely?

Was a deal done to get an insanity diagnosis because other institutions weren't available to hold him, or deemed unsuitable?

RE: There's A Killer On The Road

Looks like there's been a hi-Jac-ing, too. grin

Hello, Nam. wave

I'm curious. How do you get on a plane to California with no ID, no money and no luggage without raising suspicion?

RE: There's A Killer On The Road

How do you know that, Rainbow?

RE: If u were made...

Was that meant for me, Pat?

Are you smarting because it's nearly Christmas and I haven't sent you my knickers?

RE: If u were made...

I get to choose...? wow

Okay, be cool Jac, be cool! DeeDee thinks you're cool. yay

Hmmm... (that was a cool hmmm)

How about Ministress of Buxom Librarians?

I could be really cool doing that.

And have access to lots of interesting books, like that hilarious Dostoyevski fella and books about tomato hybrids and shit. Well, not books about shit literally, or literary, or stuff. That would be uncool.

This is a list of forum posts created by jac_the_gripper.

back to top
neny08: "Hello"(meet us in the forums)
We use cookies to ensure that you have the best experience possible on our website. Read Our Privacy Policy Here