The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This is where I live: [URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hereford/worcs/3818411.stm[/URL]
People who park in disabled spaces don't bother me. People who stare at me don't bother me. People who talk loudly and slowly to me don't bother me. People who ask me a question by talking to the person pushing my chair don't bother me.
But, if I found out who these kids were I would call in a few favours from some of my larger friends - I know of at least two mates who wouldn't be adverse to introducing these two f###ing c##ts to the world of pain.
I am angry.
People who park in disabled spaces don't bother me. People who stare at me don't bother me. People who talk loudly and slowly to me don't bother me. People who ask me a question by talking to the person pushing my chair don't bother me.
But, if I found out who these kids were I would call in a few favours from some of my larger friends - I know of at least two mates who wouldn't be adverse to introducing these two f###ing c##ts to the world of pain.
I am angry.
Page:
and as for political correctness, pfft.
Bring back classroom canings, the fact remains that our parents generation are much nicer people than ours. There is a lack of discipline and whilst it may not be nice to hit kids, its for the better in the long run.
Political correctness can kiss my fat white ass.
Did I say white? oops I meant 'British', wouldn't want to upset anyone now would I.
Bring back classroom canings, the fact remains that our parents generation are much nicer people than ours. There is a lack of discipline and whilst it may not be nice to hit kids, its for the better in the long run.
Political correctness can kiss my fat white ass.
Did I say white? oops I meant 'British', wouldn't want to upset anyone now would I.
Borat is 100% right and if I wasn't so wasteful I'd vote for him, assuming he gained a political identity.
When I was young if I did something wrong I got a slap on the backside, and it stung, and thus taught me. When I got older and slapping me didnt work my parents used methods such as banning me from tv, from seeing my friends and suchlike and they drummed it into me bloody good. I'm still not perfect, I threw eggs at peoples houses when I was younger and the expected mischevious activities but I'm not killing old people, attacking the disabled or battling the police in portugal.
It really is down to the parents. The sad fact is the the parents of these young hooligans are probably not a lot older than them and are joining in with the same activities. They probably still go out and drink cider on the streets and throw rocks at cars. This isn't the kids fault entirely, though I'm not going to say they're blameless, but if nobody teaches them to have a social and moral conscience then how the hell are they going to know whats right or wrong? A persons parents of guardians are the biggest influence on them and if they set a bad example the kids are going to follow in their footsteps. Who's going to teach them any different, teachers? No because they follow their parents and don't go to school.
When I was young if I did something wrong I got a slap on the backside, and it stung, and thus taught me. When I got older and slapping me didnt work my parents used methods such as banning me from tv, from seeing my friends and suchlike and they drummed it into me bloody good. I'm still not perfect, I threw eggs at peoples houses when I was younger and the expected mischevious activities but I'm not killing old people, attacking the disabled or battling the police in portugal.
It really is down to the parents. The sad fact is the the parents of these young hooligans are probably not a lot older than them and are joining in with the same activities. They probably still go out and drink cider on the streets and throw rocks at cars. This isn't the kids fault entirely, though I'm not going to say they're blameless, but if nobody teaches them to have a social and moral conscience then how the hell are they going to know whats right or wrong? A persons parents of guardians are the biggest influence on them and if they set a bad example the kids are going to follow in their footsteps. Who's going to teach them any different, teachers? No because they follow their parents and don't go to school.
Rosalind wrote:
> Of course I was disciplined. Every child need Disclipline, without
> it they would run amok. I do believe that disapline without love or
> affirmation of love is dangerous.
Hmm...well, wouldn't you say it's possible to smack ones kids and still love them?
>
>
>
> I was under the impression that Pandemonium (and mainly because of
> this section of his post "A smack is not abuse. It's a way of
> disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids
> not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.") thought that all
> children needed physical discipline. That is what I was disagreeing
> with. Although I wouldn't physically discipline my own children
> (probably, athough I'm willing to admit that my views may change when
> I have my own childern and the little f***ers drive my up the wall,
> and I end up battering their heads against the wall)
Well, to be blunt I'd say you were wrong. Not sure how saying that "smacking isn't abuse" (which is something I agree with; beating on the other hand IS abuse) equates with "kids only need physical discipline". Though, for the record, I do agree with you in that kids definitely cannot be raised on physical discipline alone. But misunderstandings happen, and no-one can blame someone for getting the wrong end of the stick.
>
>
> >>As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t
> give a
> >>damn……………
>
> >Does this speak for itself?
>
> Oh for *%^&'s SAKE Ros...when did you become so damned
> humourless?
> Okay; did it at any point cross your mind that possibly, just maybe,
> Pandaemonium said "pah" [edited] being flippant and joking
> around. I
> have the advantagehere because I know Pandaemonium and know the sort
>
> of tone he uses, but could you not perhaps have checked before
> launching your Kitten-esque retort?
>
> There was no humour in " As to the disrespectful tone. I really,
> really don’t give a damn……………" and I thought we were
> having a disscusion on our views not a joking session.
No, there wasn't. But bearing in mind it was in response to YOUR saying thaht the word "pah" was disrespectful, are you at all surprised at the aggressive response? Come ON Ros; "pah"? Disrespectful? "pah"? Are you starting to see just how ridiculous that assertion is?
It's also possible to discuss serious views with a little humour.
> It's very
> convients for you to play the I have no humour and I'm a feminist
> card whenever you disagree with me.
Right; that is NOT the case at all. You may have noticed that by my saying that I do actually agree with your opinion that sexism is out of order. That's nothing to do with 'convenience' or dismissing your opinion on spurious grounds because I don't have a decent argument to back up what I say. I'm dismissing your argument that he was disrespectful because it's based solely (and I can hardly believe I'm writing this) on the word "pah".
I'm not saying you have no humour; I'm saying you are treating this particular debate with self-importance and a lack of humour.
> If Pandemoniums, Pah was in
> humour then I was wrong and I'm sorry, and he only needed to mention
> that to get my apology. I tend to take things at face value, as that
> is often as they are meant.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't believe that. Not the apology; you're one of the few on this board who will apologise and I appreciate that about you. But about your "I take things at face value". You're a very intelligent woman, and I point blank refuse to accept that you take what is written here literally more often than not, or that you don't see sarcasm and irony in the written word.
>
> I've barely made a post here in the last few months, somewhat fearing
> the intellectual snobbery that abounds. When have I in this post or
> in any (apart from a passing mention to a reported post incident
> which was a few months ago, and does not concern anyone still posting
> on this forum) mentioned sexism? I am certainly no feminist, and if
> you knew me, you would know that I spend much of my time making
> jokes at my own expense to amuse others.
How about in your response to my post on Beckham when you darkly hinted at my supposed misogyny? You apologised (and I believe I apologised for my aggressive response) and fair play to you for doing so, but that coupled with your response to Pandaemonium alnog with the mention of a complaint about sexism (and I say again, I think you're right to complain about that) led me to believe that you are leaving the ranks of someone who wants to be treated as an equal human being and entering the forces of the Humourless.
I'm not entirely sure where your belief about intellectual snobbery comes from, and as I don't know you I can't comment. But then, neither do you know Pandaemonium or myself and you've made some pretty thoughtless statements about both of us.
>
> I thought we were having a disscusion of our views. I in no way
> meant to be offensive to anyone, and I would not want to upset
> anyone. If I have intentionally or otherwise then I'm sorry. My
> feelings have been upset, but I doubt if anyone cares about that.
>
That is bull. Moreover, it rather confirms my suspicion that you're wallowing self-pity and humourless. No-one cares about your feelings? Why then have I just spent time posting a response explaining myself to you and trying to make things as clear as possible so as to avoid misunderstanding? Really, your apology sounds hollow coming as it does with a line which (in my opinion) is intended to ilicit sympathy. If you want to debate and argue, then give as good as you get and good luck to you. If you don't want to be a victim of sexism, then quit playing the "I'm a fragile little flower who's feelings you've hurt" card. It's demeaning to you.
> In any case before any more feelings get hurt I should perhaps keep
> my views to myself.
Nope, nope,nope. I will not have you playing the poor and wounded soldier. As ever, I apologise for being aggressive in my response. But lets face facts here; we are lines of text on a screen to each other, and nothing else. If you want to 'keep your views to yourself' then that's your prerogative. I'd rather you didn't, but it's a free country. But don't you dare try and imply that you're being forcibly silenced on this board. No-one is stopping you saying anything, and I for one would explode like the apocalypse at anyone who stopped someone from posting their own opinion*. If you're going to try this approach every time someone disagrees with you, then doesn't that mean you're trying to force others not to debate you?
* - Mary's bigotry and hatemongering being the obvious exception.
> Of course I was disciplined. Every child need Disclipline, without
> it they would run amok. I do believe that disapline without love or
> affirmation of love is dangerous.
Hmm...well, wouldn't you say it's possible to smack ones kids and still love them?
>
>
>
> I was under the impression that Pandemonium (and mainly because of
> this section of his post "A smack is not abuse. It's a way of
> disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids
> not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.") thought that all
> children needed physical discipline. That is what I was disagreeing
> with. Although I wouldn't physically discipline my own children
> (probably, athough I'm willing to admit that my views may change when
> I have my own childern and the little f***ers drive my up the wall,
> and I end up battering their heads against the wall)
Well, to be blunt I'd say you were wrong. Not sure how saying that "smacking isn't abuse" (which is something I agree with; beating on the other hand IS abuse) equates with "kids only need physical discipline". Though, for the record, I do agree with you in that kids definitely cannot be raised on physical discipline alone. But misunderstandings happen, and no-one can blame someone for getting the wrong end of the stick.
>
>
> >>As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t
> give a
> >>damn……………
>
> >Does this speak for itself?
>
> Oh for *%^&'s SAKE Ros...when did you become so damned
> humourless?
> Okay; did it at any point cross your mind that possibly, just maybe,
> Pandaemonium said "pah" [edited] being flippant and joking
> around. I
> have the advantagehere because I know Pandaemonium and know the sort
>
> of tone he uses, but could you not perhaps have checked before
> launching your Kitten-esque retort?
>
> There was no humour in " As to the disrespectful tone. I really,
> really don’t give a damn……………" and I thought we were
> having a disscusion on our views not a joking session.
No, there wasn't. But bearing in mind it was in response to YOUR saying thaht the word "pah" was disrespectful, are you at all surprised at the aggressive response? Come ON Ros; "pah"? Disrespectful? "pah"? Are you starting to see just how ridiculous that assertion is?
It's also possible to discuss serious views with a little humour.
> It's very
> convients for you to play the I have no humour and I'm a feminist
> card whenever you disagree with me.
Right; that is NOT the case at all. You may have noticed that by my saying that I do actually agree with your opinion that sexism is out of order. That's nothing to do with 'convenience' or dismissing your opinion on spurious grounds because I don't have a decent argument to back up what I say. I'm dismissing your argument that he was disrespectful because it's based solely (and I can hardly believe I'm writing this) on the word "pah".
I'm not saying you have no humour; I'm saying you are treating this particular debate with self-importance and a lack of humour.
> If Pandemoniums, Pah was in
> humour then I was wrong and I'm sorry, and he only needed to mention
> that to get my apology. I tend to take things at face value, as that
> is often as they are meant.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't believe that. Not the apology; you're one of the few on this board who will apologise and I appreciate that about you. But about your "I take things at face value". You're a very intelligent woman, and I point blank refuse to accept that you take what is written here literally more often than not, or that you don't see sarcasm and irony in the written word.
>
> I've barely made a post here in the last few months, somewhat fearing
> the intellectual snobbery that abounds. When have I in this post or
> in any (apart from a passing mention to a reported post incident
> which was a few months ago, and does not concern anyone still posting
> on this forum) mentioned sexism? I am certainly no feminist, and if
> you knew me, you would know that I spend much of my time making
> jokes at my own expense to amuse others.
How about in your response to my post on Beckham when you darkly hinted at my supposed misogyny? You apologised (and I believe I apologised for my aggressive response) and fair play to you for doing so, but that coupled with your response to Pandaemonium alnog with the mention of a complaint about sexism (and I say again, I think you're right to complain about that) led me to believe that you are leaving the ranks of someone who wants to be treated as an equal human being and entering the forces of the Humourless.
I'm not entirely sure where your belief about intellectual snobbery comes from, and as I don't know you I can't comment. But then, neither do you know Pandaemonium or myself and you've made some pretty thoughtless statements about both of us.
>
> I thought we were having a disscusion of our views. I in no way
> meant to be offensive to anyone, and I would not want to upset
> anyone. If I have intentionally or otherwise then I'm sorry. My
> feelings have been upset, but I doubt if anyone cares about that.
>
That is bull. Moreover, it rather confirms my suspicion that you're wallowing self-pity and humourless. No-one cares about your feelings? Why then have I just spent time posting a response explaining myself to you and trying to make things as clear as possible so as to avoid misunderstanding? Really, your apology sounds hollow coming as it does with a line which (in my opinion) is intended to ilicit sympathy. If you want to debate and argue, then give as good as you get and good luck to you. If you don't want to be a victim of sexism, then quit playing the "I'm a fragile little flower who's feelings you've hurt" card. It's demeaning to you.
> In any case before any more feelings get hurt I should perhaps keep
> my views to myself.
Nope, nope,nope. I will not have you playing the poor and wounded soldier. As ever, I apologise for being aggressive in my response. But lets face facts here; we are lines of text on a screen to each other, and nothing else. If you want to 'keep your views to yourself' then that's your prerogative. I'd rather you didn't, but it's a free country. But don't you dare try and imply that you're being forcibly silenced on this board. No-one is stopping you saying anything, and I for one would explode like the apocalypse at anyone who stopped someone from posting their own opinion*. If you're going to try this approach every time someone disagrees with you, then doesn't that mean you're trying to force others not to debate you?
* - Mary's bigotry and hatemongering being the obvious exception.
To quote Denis Leary :
"My parents beat the sh*t out of me, and I'm looking forward to beating the sh*t out of my kids".
Oh, sorry, that's not PC is it?
Political Correctness has become a cancer of our society, it's like the hippies finally took over. It's pathetic. If I saw a kid do that to a man in a motorised wheel chair, he'd better hope that motorised wheel chair had bloody good acceleration.
Cut out all this Karma crap, how are we supposed to learn our children that things are wrong? By reasoning with them? It doesn't work. Our society has taught them they can get away with whatever the hell they like. Perhaps you'd like to explain to Jamie Bulgers mum why children should not be punished in the usual way. The age for prosecution should be lowered, children need to realise that their actions have consequences. You can blame the parents to a reasonable extent, a lot of them couldn't give a sh*t either.
"My parents beat the sh*t out of me, and I'm looking forward to beating the sh*t out of my kids".
Oh, sorry, that's not PC is it?
Political Correctness has become a cancer of our society, it's like the hippies finally took over. It's pathetic. If I saw a kid do that to a man in a motorised wheel chair, he'd better hope that motorised wheel chair had bloody good acceleration.
Cut out all this Karma crap, how are we supposed to learn our children that things are wrong? By reasoning with them? It doesn't work. Our society has taught them they can get away with whatever the hell they like. Perhaps you'd like to explain to Jamie Bulgers mum why children should not be punished in the usual way. The age for prosecution should be lowered, children need to realise that their actions have consequences. You can blame the parents to a reasonable extent, a lot of them couldn't give a sh*t either.
Timmargh wrote:
> I know of at least two mates who
> wouldn't be adverse to introducing these two f###ing c##ts to the
> world of pain.
make that 3
> I know of at least two mates who
> wouldn't be adverse to introducing these two f###ing c##ts to the
> world of pain.
make that 3
Light wrote:
>> Rosalind wrote:
>> I never suggested that a smack was abuse etc...
> So you didn't need to be disciplined? Well, I'm impressed. No, really
> I am, because that puts you in the minority of people I know.
Of course I was disciplined. Every child need Disclipline, without it they would run amok. I do believe that disapline without love or affirmation of love is dangerous.
> Your attitude seems to be rather along the lines of "I didn't
> need disciplining, ergo no-one does". Whereas Pandaemoniums (and
> mine for that matter) is closer to "Discipline is needed, though
> not for everyone". I hate to say this, but that paragraph shows
> a huge lack of empathy in that you don't seem to accept that your
> experiences may not necessarily apply to everyone.
I was under the impression that Pandemonium (and mainly because of this section of his post "A smack is not abuse. It's a way of disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.") thought that all children needed physical discipline. That is what I was disagreeing with. Although I wouldn't physically discipline my own children (probably, athough I'm willing to admit that my views may change when I have my own childern and the little f***ers drive my up the wall, and I end up battering their heads against the wall)
>>> As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a
>>> damn……………>
>> Does this speak for itself?
> Oh for *%^&'s SAKE Ros...when did you become so damned
> humourless?
> Okay; did it at any point cross your mind that possibly, just maybe,
> Pandaemonium said "pah" [edited] being flippant and joking around. I
> have the advantage> here because I know Pandaemonium and know the sort
> of tone he uses, but could you not perhaps have checked before launching > your Kitten-esque retort?
There was no humour in " As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a damn……………" and I thought we were having a disscusion on our views not a joking session. It's very convients for you to play the I have no humour and I'm a feminist card whenever you disagree with me. If Pandemoniums, Pah was in humour then I was wrong and I'm sorry, and he only needed to mention that to get my apology. I tend to take things at face value, as that is often as they are meant.
At which point did you decide "If anyone displays
> any flippancy or fails to take me less than 100% seriously, I shall
> view that as disrespectful"?
> I have to say that, much though I agree that you're right in your
> general "sexism shouldn't be tolerated" mindset that you
> seem to have brought very much to the fore recently, your sniffy
> insistence that no-one makes any sort of joke at your expense isn't
> remotely helping your cause.
I've barely made a post here in the last few months, somewhat fearing the intellectual snobbery that abounds. When have I in this post or in any (apart from a passing mention to a reported post incident which was a few months ago, and does not concern anyone still posting on this forum) mentioned sexism? I am certainly no feminist, and if you knew me, you would know that I spend much of my time making jokes at my own expense to amuse others.
I thought we were having a disscusion of our views. I in no way meant to be offensive to anyone, and I would not want to upset anyone. If I have intentionally or otherwise then I'm sorry. My feelings have been upset, but I doubt if anyone cares about that.
In any case before any more feelings get hurt I should perhaps keep my views to myself.
>> Rosalind wrote:
>> I never suggested that a smack was abuse etc...
> So you didn't need to be disciplined? Well, I'm impressed. No, really
> I am, because that puts you in the minority of people I know.
Of course I was disciplined. Every child need Disclipline, without it they would run amok. I do believe that disapline without love or affirmation of love is dangerous.
> Your attitude seems to be rather along the lines of "I didn't
> need disciplining, ergo no-one does". Whereas Pandaemoniums (and
> mine for that matter) is closer to "Discipline is needed, though
> not for everyone". I hate to say this, but that paragraph shows
> a huge lack of empathy in that you don't seem to accept that your
> experiences may not necessarily apply to everyone.
I was under the impression that Pandemonium (and mainly because of this section of his post "A smack is not abuse. It's a way of disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.") thought that all children needed physical discipline. That is what I was disagreeing with. Although I wouldn't physically discipline my own children (probably, athough I'm willing to admit that my views may change when I have my own childern and the little f***ers drive my up the wall, and I end up battering their heads against the wall)
>>> As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a
>>> damn……………>
>> Does this speak for itself?
> Oh for *%^&'s SAKE Ros...when did you become so damned
> humourless?
> Okay; did it at any point cross your mind that possibly, just maybe,
> Pandaemonium said "pah" [edited] being flippant and joking around. I
> have the advantage> here because I know Pandaemonium and know the sort
> of tone he uses, but could you not perhaps have checked before launching > your Kitten-esque retort?
There was no humour in " As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a damn……………" and I thought we were having a disscusion on our views not a joking session. It's very convients for you to play the I have no humour and I'm a feminist card whenever you disagree with me. If Pandemoniums, Pah was in humour then I was wrong and I'm sorry, and he only needed to mention that to get my apology. I tend to take things at face value, as that is often as they are meant.
At which point did you decide "If anyone displays
> any flippancy or fails to take me less than 100% seriously, I shall
> view that as disrespectful"?
> I have to say that, much though I agree that you're right in your
> general "sexism shouldn't be tolerated" mindset that you
> seem to have brought very much to the fore recently, your sniffy
> insistence that no-one makes any sort of joke at your expense isn't
> remotely helping your cause.
I've barely made a post here in the last few months, somewhat fearing the intellectual snobbery that abounds. When have I in this post or in any (apart from a passing mention to a reported post incident which was a few months ago, and does not concern anyone still posting on this forum) mentioned sexism? I am certainly no feminist, and if you knew me, you would know that I spend much of my time making jokes at my own expense to amuse others.
I thought we were having a disscusion of our views. I in no way meant to be offensive to anyone, and I would not want to upset anyone. If I have intentionally or otherwise then I'm sorry. My feelings have been upset, but I doubt if anyone cares about that.
In any case before any more feelings get hurt I should perhaps keep my views to myself.
Rosalind wrote:
>
> I never suggested that a smack was abuse (when it comes to kicking a
> child around the floor I might take a different view). And I
> understand that it is way many people seek to displine there
> children. That doesn't mean that it is needed. I was never
> physically disiplined by my parents, and my parents were never
> physically disiplined by their parents. Of my grandparent I'm not
> sure, but I never heard them talk of any disipline of this type. yet
> I am not a deliquant, my parents were not deliquants. I try to
> repect people as much as possible, and be as sympathetic as I can.
So you didn't need to be disciplined? Well, I'm impressed. No, really I am, because that puts you in the minority of people I know.
Your attitude seems to be rather along the lines of "I didn't need disciplining, ergo no-one does". Whereas Pandaemoniums (and mine for that matter) is closer to "Discipline is needed, though not for everyone". I hate to say this, but that paragraph shows a huge lack of empathy in that you don't seem to accept that your experiences may not necessarily apply to everyone.
> As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a
> damn……………
>
> Does this speak for itself?
Oh for *%^&'s SAKE Ros...when did you become so damned humourless? At which point did you decide "If anyone displays any flippancy or fails to take me less than 100% seriously, I shall view that as disrespectful"?
Okay; did it at any point cross your mind that possibly, just maybe, Pandaemonium said "pah" in much the same way as the Monty Python French Knight said "Hah! I fart in your general direction"? In other words, although being derogatory on the face of it, being flippant and joking around. I have the advantage here because I know Pandaemonium and know the sort of tone he uses, but could you not perhaps have checked before launching your Kitten-esque retort?
I have to say that, much though I agree that you're right in your general "sexism shouldn't be tolerated" mindset that you seem to have brought very much to the fore recently, your sniffy insistence that no-one makes any sort of joke at your expense isn't remotely helping your cause.
>
> I never suggested that a smack was abuse (when it comes to kicking a
> child around the floor I might take a different view). And I
> understand that it is way many people seek to displine there
> children. That doesn't mean that it is needed. I was never
> physically disiplined by my parents, and my parents were never
> physically disiplined by their parents. Of my grandparent I'm not
> sure, but I never heard them talk of any disipline of this type. yet
> I am not a deliquant, my parents were not deliquants. I try to
> repect people as much as possible, and be as sympathetic as I can.
So you didn't need to be disciplined? Well, I'm impressed. No, really I am, because that puts you in the minority of people I know.
Your attitude seems to be rather along the lines of "I didn't need disciplining, ergo no-one does". Whereas Pandaemoniums (and mine for that matter) is closer to "Discipline is needed, though not for everyone". I hate to say this, but that paragraph shows a huge lack of empathy in that you don't seem to accept that your experiences may not necessarily apply to everyone.
> As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a
> damn……………
>
> Does this speak for itself?
Oh for *%^&'s SAKE Ros...when did you become so damned humourless? At which point did you decide "If anyone displays any flippancy or fails to take me less than 100% seriously, I shall view that as disrespectful"?
Okay; did it at any point cross your mind that possibly, just maybe, Pandaemonium said "pah" in much the same way as the Monty Python French Knight said "Hah! I fart in your general direction"? In other words, although being derogatory on the face of it, being flippant and joking around. I have the advantage here because I know Pandaemonium and know the sort of tone he uses, but could you not perhaps have checked before launching your Kitten-esque retort?
I have to say that, much though I agree that you're right in your general "sexism shouldn't be tolerated" mindset that you seem to have brought very much to the fore recently, your sniffy insistence that no-one makes any sort of joke at your expense isn't remotely helping your cause.
"One of the attackers is described as smelling of Lynx Phoenix deodorant."
Thats a keen sense of smell.
Thats a keen sense of smell.
Pandaemonium wrote:
> Rosalind wrote:
> EDIT: the tone of your post is disrespectful. You can assert your
> opinons, and tell me why you disagree with mine, but your
> "Pah" is derogatory.
>
> I don't disagree with your opinions. Yes, people who abuse have more
> often than not been abused. A smack is not abuse. It's a way of
> disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids
> not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.
I never suggested that a smack was abuse (when it comes to kicking a child around the floor I might take a different view). And I understand that it is way many people seek to displine there children. That doesn't mean that it is needed. I was never physically disiplined by my parents, and my parents were never physically disiplined by their parents. Of my grandparent I'm not sure, but I never heard them talk of any disipline of this type. yet I am not a deliquant, my parents were not deliquants. I try to repect people as much as possible, and be as sympathetic as I can.
> As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a
> damn……………
Does this speak for itself?
> Rosalind wrote:
> EDIT: the tone of your post is disrespectful. You can assert your
> opinons, and tell me why you disagree with mine, but your
> "Pah" is derogatory.
>
> I don't disagree with your opinions. Yes, people who abuse have more
> often than not been abused. A smack is not abuse. It's a way of
> disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids
> not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.
I never suggested that a smack was abuse (when it comes to kicking a child around the floor I might take a different view). And I understand that it is way many people seek to displine there children. That doesn't mean that it is needed. I was never physically disiplined by my parents, and my parents were never physically disiplined by their parents. Of my grandparent I'm not sure, but I never heard them talk of any disipline of this type. yet I am not a deliquant, my parents were not deliquants. I try to repect people as much as possible, and be as sympathetic as I can.
> As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a
> damn……………
Does this speak for itself?
Rosalind wrote:
> EDIT: the tone of your post is disrespectful. You can assert your
> opinons, and tell me why you disagree with mine, but your
> "Pah" is derogatory.
I don't disagree with your opinions. Yes, people who abuse have more often than not been abused. A smack is not abuse. It's a way of disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.
Your grandparents, and mine, probably suffered more physical punishment than our parents, and we even less (you so possibly less than me, I'm thirty, I don't know how old you are).
Did they abuse their children? Discipline yes, abuse, certainly not.
As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a damn……………
> EDIT: the tone of your post is disrespectful. You can assert your
> opinons, and tell me why you disagree with mine, but your
> "Pah" is derogatory.
I don't disagree with your opinions. Yes, people who abuse have more often than not been abused. A smack is not abuse. It's a way of disciplining your child. Look at the state society is in now. Kids not showing respect etc. yada, yada, yada.
Your grandparents, and mine, probably suffered more physical punishment than our parents, and we even less (you so possibly less than me, I'm thirty, I don't know how old you are).
Did they abuse their children? Discipline yes, abuse, certainly not.
As to the disrespectful tone. I really, really don’t give a damn……………
Page: