Tweet
Why do we even waste our time with this fool? He's Canada's version of Wiglaf, but with the grammar and language skills of faded glory. I don't even understand what the hell he's trying to say most of the time, and I certainly don't understand what that last post was all about, or how it's relevant. Honestly, is male rape as ignored as he suggests? I certainly don't think so.
-
"My nation is the world, and my religion is to do good." --Thomas Paine
"The subject of onanism is inexhaustable." --Sigmund Freud -
I need to get to class today, but I will read ALL the posts on here, and then I will tell you what I think about this bull****.
later
A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
Cool it MrFun. No need to get hyped over one poster's comments here. We're all pretty doubtful of this whole thing.Comment
-
Exactly MrWhereItsAt. I have nothing more to say concerning this topic.Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
We're all pretty doubtful of this whole thing.
____________________________
"One day if I do go to heaven, I'm going to do what every San Franciscan does who goes to heaven - I'll look around and say, 'It ain't bad, but it ain't San Francisco.'" - Herb Caen, 1996
"If God, as they say, is homophobic, I wouldn't worship that God." - Archbishop Desmond Tutu
____________________________Comment
-
Originally posted by blackice
Soooooooooooo the author was right, wrong? Can you be more clear as to what you believe to be the situation...
Show me your realities. Post a counter publication... do something other than "troll" Simply posting what you did has no merit at all. This person worked on this report... You spent 1 minute discounting it with no substance at all....
"Troll"
thanks for the example...until you posted I was unsure what it meant... Your 1 minute example presents a perfect example of the 1 minute "troll" response... 
I give it -1 out of 0 as you offer nothing... 
EXAMPLE: This is an example of what one does when they have been proven wrong and can't come up with a decent response except to say Troll! They lack the common intellect to give an appropriate response besides Troll.
So kiddies.......follow this example and JUST SAY NO TO THE TROLL MAN!!Welcome to earth, my name is Tia and I'll be your tour guide for this trip.
Succulent and Bejeweled Mother Goddess, who is always moisturised yet never greasy, always patient yet never suffers fools~Starchild
Dragons? Yup- big flying lizards with an attitude. ~ Laz
You are forgiven because you are FABULOUS ~ ImranComment
-
To steer this in a productive direction.
Actually Case, the nuclear family is at least as old as the medieval ages.
Back then people waited until they were in their late 20s to marry, primarily because the way they got a start inf life (land, tools, house, etc.) was by getting them from dead parents. So, basically everyone waited for their parents to die (if you were a peasant). It would depend on how many siblings you had and which set of parents died first in a relationship on where you ended up living. I'm taking (well, finishing) a course on the medieval ages, and this is all according to Prof. Zook.I never know their names, But i smile just the same
New faces...Strange places,
Most everything i see, Becomes a blur to me
-Grandaddy, "The Final Push to the Sum"Comment
-
Prof. Zook sounds a bit of a kook to me....
Head back 1000 years and a woman who hadn't been pregnant at least 5 times would have been considered a freak. Given the levels of childhood mortality, had everyone waited to their late 20's before breeding we'd be extinct.The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil FinlandComment
-
Except of course if she died before, which was sadly not unusual.Originally posted by Bugs ****ing Bunny
Prof. Zook sounds a bit of a kook to me....
Head back 1000 years and a woman who hadn't been pregnant at least 5 times would have been considered a freak.
A woman not having there child before 18 was a freak too.Zobo Ze Warrior
--
Your brain is your worst enemy!Comment
-
Check it out - they may have had kids earlier - but they weren't married until late twenties. They didn't have tons of kids. Yes, you're right that they may have been pregnant, but they didn't come to term with many of them, and of those that did - whoo boy, lots of nasty stuff happened.I never know their names, But i smile just the same
New faces...Strange places,
Most everything i see, Becomes a blur to me
-Grandaddy, "The Final Push to the Sum"Comment
-
Doesn't that completely arse up your notion of the nuclear family then?The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil FinlandComment
-
It depends. I think men married quite late. They should have a situation. Women should have married quite young.Originally posted by MacTBone
Check it out - they may have had kids earlier - but they weren't married until late twenties. They didn't have tons of kids. Yes, you're right that they may have been pregnant, but they didn't come to term with many of them, and of those that did - whoo boy, lots of nasty stuff happened.Zobo Ze Warrior
--
Your brain is your worst enemy!Comment
-
I wonder if it is because there are more repressed homosexuals
(if the stat is correct)
Jon MillerJon Miller-
I AM.CANADIAN
GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.Comment
-
Nahhh, both women and men married later than teens. Women were generally a couple years younger, but they weren't in their teens.
It was actually quite similar to now.
All I know, is that the household did not consist of parents, grandparents, etc. It was just kids and their parents. So, that would not blow my theory out of the water. Most likely, if someone got pregnant the parents threw them out.
Makes sense to me, they didn't have much to live on - why would you want another mouth to feed?I never know their names, But i smile just the same
New faces...Strange places,
Most everything i see, Becomes a blur to me
-Grandaddy, "The Final Push to the Sum"Comment
-
I have cooled it, and now that I have thought about this, let's follow the author's false logic towards other groups of people:Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Cool it MrFun. No need to get hyped over one poster's comments here. We're all pretty doubtful of this whole thing.
1) Some whites are racist --- thus, all whites have the tendency to be racist.
2) Some women want an abortion --- thus, all women are tempted to have an abortion.
3) Some blacks are rapists --- thus, all blacks are tempted to rape.
4) Some conservatives are homophobic --- thus, all conservatives have tendency towards homophobia.
5) Some heterosexuals are rapists --- thus, all heterosexuals are tempted to rape.
The author amazes me with the guttural-logic.
PS: I realize most Apolytoners are intelligent enough not to take the author seriously.Last edited by MrFun; April 30, 2002, 15:13.A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
It is interesting that there is a hetero-homo double standard, namely that antigay people think it's perfectly fine to judge every homosexual by the acts of a few, whether those acts even relate to homosexuality or not. But the reverse logic doesn't seem to apply, as the overwhelming majority of horrible deeds on this earth have been committed by heterosexuals. It's just a matter of numerical superiority.
I believe it is another, subtle way in which antigay people try to debase and dehumanize homosexuals. When you lump them into groups and make mass-generalizations that "they" are all "this" and do "that," it makes it easier to see gays as a monolithic "evil" rather than as what gays are--individual human beings who are just as prone to virtue and vice as anyone else.
There is no "gay culture," but there are gays in every culture.Tutto nel mondo è burlaComment
Comment