 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries'
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:53 PM LOL :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:43 PM See??? No good deed goes unpunished here... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:06 PM Larry.....sorry mate, but you're "full of it"....Best Wishes... Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 04:59 PM Well, Larry, that was pretty weak, dude... I mean, I gotta ol' Wheaties box with Arnold Palmer on it that could probably do better than that... No, no... My sister could do better than that... No, no... Yo mama could do better than that... Just funnin', dude... No, that was pretty thoughtful and I'm sure that someone will come along and trash it so I figured I'd get it out of the way so you wouldn't have to wait... "The waiting is the hardest part"... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 28 Aug 13 - 04:45 PM Hi Suzy...Its all true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:09 PM Hello fellow mudcatters, It does look like this thread is moving toward closure. Just to bring it back to the topic of reinforcing respectful boundaries, I'd like to focus on what I've learned about myself....including what I want and what I do that reinforces respect or contributes to the disrespect......through reading this thread. 1. When somebody posts absolute nonsense where the purpose seems obvious that it is to simply 'incite' people.........I will chose to ignore it. And, if everybody ignores it, it goes away (I notice that the most recent obama is evil thread seems to have disappeared). 2. I don't really know much at all about the complexity of the interrelationships amongst mudcatters. My intention is to simply enjoy watching them unfold. 3. I want to avoid any attempts at 'triangulation' where somebody wants to convince me to take their side against another mudcatter (no problem with somebody wanting me to take their side regarding in *issue*). 4. Very few mudcatters want any kind of specific 'policy' about what to do about disrespectful language. Some feel that more important is that 'bigger picture' where a person's opinions could lead to an oppressed (or even not so oppressed) group being harmed. 5. It's ok to call people names provided it's done 'lovingly'....or it's a play on their mudcat name. (although, at this point, I personally don't want to do that......maybe when I become a more 'established' mudcatter). 6. Whatever our view is on evolution, it's often quite unpredictable as to how a thread will 'evolve'. 7. It's a real challenge when giving personal feedback on mudcat (just as it is in real life) to avoid accusing or judging the other person, and instead, to focus on how a particular statement affects *me*. But it's something I want to practice. 8. Only one person posted a STOP after they witnessed another mudcatter being put down. It didn't seem to have a huge effect...and nobody even commented on it. This suggests that most mudcatters aren't really interested in doing that. Thanks folks. I've enjoyed being a part of this thread. -Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket getting his tuppence worth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:40 AM The MMR issue was appalling and quite rightly Dr Wakefield was struck off. He is carrying on his flawed research though. As he cannot practice here, I note he now works in Texas. God bless America. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 28 Aug 13 - 06:35 AM ""Think back.....school.....maybe kindergarten....mandatory polio shots...come on..think...think....but then you may be dealing with a handicap that you mentioned......'As far as I am aware'"" Wrong I'm afraid GfS, at least in the UK! Parents were told the advantages and it was assumed that they would all agree, but the children of any who objected were not vaccinated. In this country it is illegal and constitutes assault to medicate a child without parental consent. Schools can't even administer a child's dose aspirin without parental consent. This is why measles has become a problem again. Some stupid ar****le claimed that MMR vaccine was linked to autism. His research was utterly debunked, being absolute nonsense, but it scared a generation of parents into saying "NO!" It takes a court order to override parents wishes. I don't know what the situation is in the US, but I imagine it is the same. Have there not been court cases over Christian Scientists and Jehovah Witnesses refusing treatment for dying children? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:06 AM What, Goofball? More silly invective, but no answer to my questions? Quelle surprise!! Congenital ignoramus! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 11:28 PM I agree with Bobert on this one. It's Bush all over again..(but that I've been saying for a long time anyway.... Firth, your 'information' isn't even information, it's only your opinion, not only that, it is an uninformed opinion..like most of what you call 'logic'..with NO back up. Bobert is getting ahead of you, ya' better watch out! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:28 PM I've got a lot of good information in my post above. But Goofball simply dismisses it with one word. "Rubbish!" Congratulations again, Goofup, you once again dodge the necessity of thinking. Typical. By the way, here's a question for you. Where, historically, do the terms "Right" and "Left" come from? That is, when and where were they first used, and by whom? And what did they originally refer to? (There's a question he'll dodge for sure! Requires a bit of reading and thinking. Ain't gonna happen!!) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 27 Aug 13 - 07:37 PM Yo, Ake... GfinS is waiting for the Syria talking points from the Tea Party... Me??? I'd rather not see any military action against Syria... I don't see where it helps the US in any manner... I think it is stupid... Now, if it were possible to just cleanly take out the chemical weapons then I might go for that but I doubt if that can be done... BTW, if we could cleanly take out chemical weapons anywhere, the US included, I'd be all for that... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Aug 13 - 07:00 PM I am an independent, like it or lump it. I suppose that's because no-one else will have anything to do with you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 27 Aug 13 - 05:40 PM Akenaton, I like your bat story :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 05:03 PM Firth's comments are total rubbish. and Bobert's not much better. I am an independent, like it or lump it. Akenaton: "This could very easily turn Mr Obama into Mr Bush part2 and endanger world peace." Are you trying to say he wasn't already??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 04:24 PM Spleen Cringe, GfS seems to accept it as an article of faith (or an easy way of avoiding having to read and learn) that people always hue to the party line, whichever party it happens to be. It is true that many people do. But definitely not all. But as is his wont, he assumes that everyone who expresses an opinion about something is conforming to one political party or another. By simply pigeon-holing someone into a "party line," GfS apparently feels this makes it unnecessary to bother examining what the person is saying and dismiss a well thought out opinion merely by calling that person something like "a loony Liberal." And his glib, but highly inaccurate remark (with which he has blown off people's opinions many times) that "Right Wing and Left Wing are both on the same bird!" demonstrates that he has no idea of where the terms "Right" and "Left" as indicating political positions originally came from, and still mean, basically, what they did originally. Right Wing and Left Wing have nothing at all to do with birds. He (and another contributor, who usually drops into a discussion merely to kibbitz and go "tsk tsk!" if someone has a strong opinion) is an advocate of the aphorism, "You can't fight City Hall!" Failing to realize that, of course you can fight City Hall—and change things—and that the aphorism was started by City Hall in hopes of discouraging anyone who wants to try it. When it comes to politics (or much of anything else), GfS is not a deep thinker. He has his wants and prejudices, but he has obviously failed to heed the admonition of Socrates that "the unexamined life is not worth living," or the oft quoted inscription in the forecourt of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, "Know thyself." For clarity of thought, one needs to have a well-thought out personal philosophy, which must include an ethical code whereby one judges (among other things) the behavior of the political actions of the various parties and individuals. If one merely accepts "the party line," one is not thinking. GfS does not seem to have a concept of this, and his knee-jerk reaction to anyone with whom he does not agree or who does not agree with him is to accuse them of thoughtlessly accepting the "party line," when it is he who is not bothering to try to think. Apparently, too much trouble. And as to the political opinions he has expressed, Bobert is absolutely right. GfS follows the Tea Party / KKK line. Although he denies that he is following any political line. He just hasn't bothered to think about it. ======== And Ake, I do not want to see the United States get embroiled with Syria, but I have the strange feeling that if the U. S. does nothing in the face of the illegal use of chemical weapons against its citizens, you will be on board faulting the U. S. for that! This should be the purview of the United Nations. But if the U. N. just sits on its hands and the U. S. does the same, strange how the U. S. is always the bad guy, no matter what it does! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 27 Aug 13 - 03:50 PM Bobert.....with the greatest respect, the hypocrisy of actions being contemplated by the current administration with regard to Syria should be apparent to all of us, not just Tea Party supporters. This could very easily turn Mr Obama into Mr Bush part2 and endanger world peace. I agree with Sanity and LH that the Dems and Pubs are two cheeks of the same arse. We are in a worse situation in the UK...our arse has THREE cheeks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 27 Aug 13 - 02:42 PM BS, GfinS... Once again you deny being a TeaPub or supporter of the Republican Party yet you have always been the first one here with the very latest TeaPub talking point... Tell the truth... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 02:36 PM Spleen Cringe, I can see why you you may think that...but often, it is 'politics' in general, that by their very nature, tend to herd people into two major parties, both of which, dictate to their members, what they should think, according to their party's agenda...and more often then not, they are built on misinformation, that goes contrary to common sense..but they wrap it in plausible, and seemingly altruistic causes and programs....Here, better than me explaining it try this and keep in mind that he is speaking from his country, which is currently occupied by a government, that is occupied by a two party system, both of which have displayed massive corruption. Now, as for me, I am a musician, composer, recording artist...none of which have anything to do with the political system, other than witnessing those two parties, destroying the peace and creativity, of a lot of my fellow musicians, and causing divisions among the people who they claim to 'represent'...when in reality, they TELL people what to believe, and make issues that corral people to their side, for the sake of their side..and not, for the side of the people they pretend to be representing! it's more like they conscript people to represent THEM, and not the other way around!! I could go on with specifics, but this will do for now. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Spleen Cringe Date: 27 Aug 13 - 12:09 PM Personally I think it's disingenious to promote your strongly-worded political views whilst simultaneously claiming to be above, beyond or "not interested" in politics. I'm not talking here about party politics, or even necessarily ideology, but expressions of beliefs held about society and the groups and individuals within it. Such expressions are by their very nature political, whether the person making them accepts and owns this or not. So when GfS, for example, talks of "common sense" rather than politics, I'm disinclined to accept this at face value, especially when notions such as "common sense" tend to be ideological constructs in themselves. Larry... thank you for including me in your list. I must try harder to be obnoxious in future! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:16 AM Didn't answer the questions, GfinS... Normal... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 27 Aug 13 - 01:50 AM It was probably President Obarma. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 27 Aug 13 - 01:48 AM It's those damn 'r's. Whoever invented them anyway? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 12:48 AM Well chasing you guys around trying to get you to stop sniping and just tell the truth..and ACCEPT the truth..I guess one has to go round and round!...while dodging some pretty WILD accusations! oh, and I'm not a Republican, either...'I'm not with the party..I'm with the band' ....and Larry, the word is foment...not forment....(used a lot in legal briefings and 'Friend of the Court' letters. ...and sometimes I write in the forum quickly..When I did the screenplay, I hand wrote it, and had it typed out...and then, i learned, it's best NOT to proofread it yourself...you go right over stuff, and don't see it.... ....maybe that's why Don comes back the way he does...he doesn't read it right.....Nawwww.. NOT! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 08:51 PM GfinS's doctor says he should be walking so he doesn't have another heart attack... Doc also wants GfinS to not smoke... Yo GfinS??? You walkin'??? You smokin'??? I'd guess no to the walk and yes to the smoke... I mean, I like GfinS... Sure, he's a whacked out closet Republican but, hey, nobody is perfect... Well, my wife, the P-Vine, is pretty close but she, ahhhhhh... Never mind that... Bottom line here??? Don writes well and GfinS just rambles on and on and on and on... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 08:36 PM True, when working as a radio announcer, in the newscasts, I read what came in on the teletype--as I was instructed to do. But when I worked at another station as a news director, I was responsible for interviewing people, charged with getting the story right, then writing it up, and was held responsible if I blew it. Which I never did. I also worked as an editor and report writer for a firm under contract to the Department of Energy, in a residential weatherization program. I also have had--I forget now how many--around thirty articles published in various magazines, including an article in Sing Our! some years ago. I'm fairly skilled at reading the work of others and figuring out what they are trying to say, and in writing my own material clearly and concisely. Skilled enough so that I was paid to do it. My bookshelves contain several style manuals, including The Chicago Style Manual, the New York Times Style Manual, and a copy of The Elements of Style, by Strunk and White (an excellent guide for writers; highly recommended). Not to mention another half-dozen books on writing technique (I was a one-time member of the "Writer's Digest Book Club") Does Goofballupagus even own a dictionary? Go take a walk, Goofy, and breathe some fresh air. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 08:20 PM Danged... I thought "forment" was part of making moonshine, another of my favorite vices... Guess not... My bad... B;~( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 26 Aug 13 - 08:15 PM Sorry GFS. I'm really not interested in finding any evidence as to what a horrible person Don, Bobert, your, Akenaton, or anybody else is. All we can do is take responsibility for our own part in this 'formenting'. And my part is to not give it any more air (or whatever it is that causes something to 'forment' something. But thanks for the new word. Forment: –verb (used with object) 1. to instigate or foster (discord, rebellion, etc.); promote the growth or development of: to foment trouble; to foment discontent. 2. to apply warm water or medicated liquid, ointments, etc., to (the surface of the body). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:50 PM LOL... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:43 PM Nonsense! Larry, if you want to see what foments this, and it has been going on for quite a while with Don, (Bobert is a recent addition to his parrot collection), go look at the thread: 'BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'....take a look at the last few, and feel free to browse any or all of it....they don't EXCHANGE ideas...they have one already stuck in their brick lined heads, and have accused several others of even being part of the KKK!!! Take a look...and as far as Don being a 'journalist'..he read the news that was already prepared for him, once upon a time... Check out the other thread....see for yourself! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:32 PM At least you are trying, Larry... GfinS's history here is one on long winded treatises/manifesto/rants that say absolutely nothing... Don is a real journalist... I mean, trained... Has a resume' to go along with his credentials... Me??? I try to put it out so there is no ambiguity and think I pretty much hit the mark... People may not like what I say but I rarely am accused of not being clear in what I am trying to communicate... GfinS??? Much different story... Subterfuge, verbiage, circular reasoning??? Yeah... Here's the interesting thing about GfinS... He loves to say that he doesn't get his info from FOX and right wing blogs but seems to post no other opinions??? Go figure??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:20 PM Language is such an imperfect way of communicating, even at the best of times, Don. I agree that we all have an onus to be as clear as possible with verbal (incl. written) communication. But I think that we also have an onus to 'check out' with others about what they mean (if we're interested) rather than assuming. I know that from the feedback I've had from my posts, I've had a few surprises (is that really what he/she thought I was saying?). And I thought I was clear. But.......again, we all have our own ways of presenting and receiving information. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 06:54 PM My favorite high school English teacher used to say, "Clear and readable writing indicates clear and well-organized thinking." I must have been doing something right, because I got A's in her Creative Writing classes, and she sent one of my short stories into the Atlantic Monthly High School Short Story Contest and I came up with an honorable mention. Also, I have worked as an editor in a couple of jobs, one of which involved trying to make sense out of government documents. I don't think I misinterpret other peoples' writing anywhere near as much as they try to claim I do. Maybe they need to think a bit before they hunker over the keyboard and start pecking away. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 05:54 PM Bobert: "Don is right... Your writing style makes trying to find your points all but impossible to decipher.." You ought to see my doctors handwriting....almost as bad as my dentist's! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 26 Aug 13 - 05:44 PM Ian old pal, I have been quoting HPA figures for years, get up to speed mate :0) For all your twisting on the hook, the telling statistics are. 2/3% of the population(MSM), account for 60% of all new cases of HIV and 70% of all new cases of Syphilis. Other STDs have slightly lower rates, but still many times higher that heterosexuals. It is impossible to distort these figures, they are set down in the HPA and CDC websites, there is no way to make them look better or worse than they are. Both the HIV and Syphilis figures indicate epidemic rates amongst MSM, this is why I favour compulsory testing and contact tracing. If these rates of infection were duplicated in hetero men or even IDU's I would favour compulsory testing and contact tracing for them also, but to test the whole population of the UK or the US just to validate a politically correct agenda, would be crass foolishness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 04:28 PM Brevity, GfinS, brevity... Your post are like reading some whacked out wacko who is going thru a free association trip... If you have a point then just make it without all the clutter... Don is right... Your writing style makes trying to find your points all but impossible to decipher... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 03:43 PM If I "overlooked" any of your posts, Goofball, it's because they were bloody incomprehensible, which seems to be your usual writing style. Your previous posts are clinging to your ass like angry pit-bulls. You should think about that possibility before you post some of your balderdash. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 03:22 PM Firth: "I've already waded trough the Prop 8 thread several times to verify that people actually said what they later denied--particularly GfS." So did I..Your hostile and dishonest behavior in that thread is atrocious, only outdone by your spinning to call attention to yourself! Not only did I go through that thread, get a load of your nonsense in the 'Death penalty for Homosexuals' thread. You have an AMAZING capacity, to overlook some of my posts, in which others have agreed with me, and spin what has been said in it, playing to your like minded politicos, and painting things in, that were NEVER said, or even intimated! ..and you're still trying to do it now! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket sad now Date: 26 Aug 13 - 02:54 PM Read your post above my last one, or get a friend to read it to you. If you have one. If they are a friend, perhaps they will point out nicely to you that generalising in a derogatory way about a section of society isn't nice, isn't clever and now, isn't legal. You won't see me in court, you thick twat. I have better things to do than turn up to stare at dead horses. Homophobia is at long last becoming an embarrassing aspect of the past. Criminalising it is a bit strong, I admit, but if it helps save lives eh? I suggest you look at some websites that may be new to you? The Health Protection Agency for instance. Ok, they are changing their name, same as every other quango these days, but they have some fascinating data. The bit I commend to you is where they note how gay people tend to cluster, especially in cities so they can go about their business with less stigma from ignorant people who see them as different in some way. A similar trait exists in many other minority groups, hence health statistics are skewed. We end up with asking why late onset diabetes is prevalent in some Northern towns. Oh, that'll be Indian Sub Continent clusters. HIV? Gay people end to drift to areas of large cities where they are either ignored or accepted. Either being better than disapproving looks from peasants. Health statistics.. Fascinating when understood, dangerous when pounced upon to justify odious views about people who are different to you. Akenhateon still hasn't explained to those still wishing to give him the benefit of the doubt why forcing gay people to come forward for testing of HIV is a good idea but forcing women to come forward to explain their sex lives and be tested for clamydia, which is a far more dangerous issue for society is a bad idea and I need to be struck from Mudcat for suggesting women could be as dirty as "homosexuals." Hang on, I'm about to puke. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 01:20 PM Armed white guy stalks and murders unarmed black teenager in Florida and gets away with it... The End B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:56 PM Ake, I've already waded trough the Prop 8 thread several times to verify that people actually said what they later denied--particularly GfS. I'm not going to do it every damned time someone has a hissy-fit when something they posted comes back to bite them in the behind. If you're so certain you didn't say what I said you said, YOU look it up. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:51 PM Ian my friend, you didn't echo anything, you twisted everything.....See you in court!! :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:39 PM Don...I have never said such a thing....it just does not make sense, that would mean that 1 in 2 male homosexuals have hiv? (Possibly a typo?) See if you can find it, or are you working from memory? The highest ratio in some cities is at the moment 1 in 4 or 5. However if infection rates continue to rise at the present rates, the ratios will rise correspondingly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:35 PM Sorry about that last post. It was supposed to be on the one about television and movies. But what the heck....any topic seems acceptable on this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:32 PM The altercation would never have happened it Zimmerman had obeyed the police and not approached Martin, who, for good reason, felt threatened. We only have Zimmerman's claim that Martin was beating his head on the sidewalk. Martin was no longer alive to make a counter-claim. In effect, Zimmerman attacked Martin, not the other way around. Go take an aspirin. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:26 PM Ake, you made that statement along about the Prop 8 thread, and to support your point, you also posted a link to a pie chart published by the CDC. BUT--the pie chart did not say what you said it did. Perhaps you misread it. But I not only looked at the pie chart but read the text that went with it, which you, apparently, did not. ======== I am astounded at the people who made wild statements on the Prop 8 thread, then later deny that they said it! But there it is, for anyone who has the endurance to pull up the Prop 8 thread and plow through it. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:24 PM beardedbruce: "DonF, "is murdered by a trigger-happy vigilante for nothing more than being black and wearing a hooded sweatshirt?" NOT why he was shot. OK, then beating your head against a sidewalk is acceptable to you?" Excellent call on his twisting!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Larry The Radio Guy Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:23 PM From the Canadian Archives. It's understandable that there is so much confusion about this, as his 'hot media' vs 'cool media' concept wasn't very well developed. Cool media (tv, seminars, cartoons) requires little involvement----so we have to work harder in order to perceive it. McLuhan Hot and Cool When McLuhan discussed visual space, he usually associated it with "hot media." Hot media are high in definition, and thus demand little participation on the part of the user. Generally speaking, they are associated with the eye, rather than the ear. Some hot media (such as print), are like visual space in that they are sequential, linear and logical. Acoustic space, on the other hand, is usually associated with "cool media," and generally with the ear. Cool media are low in definition, and demand high participation from the user. In contrast to hot media, which favour analytical precision, quantitative analysis and sequential ordering, cool media demand perception of abstract patterning and simultaneous comprehension of all parts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket happy now Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:19 PM I would just like to echo everything my best friend Akenhateon just said. No, I really would! He says he doesn't hate gay people, or homosexuals as he so quaintly calls them. I love hearing people say they don't hate other people based on their social profiles rather than their individual actions. He then goes on to say why he hates them. Sorted! I don't have to keep reminding people as the stupid, thick as pig shit moron tells us that "they " have problems having sex so will always be inferior. Homophobia is fascinating if only in that it is practiced entirely by those not educated or clever enough to realise the hurt and distress they cause others. Back in your hole worm. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 26 Aug 13 - 09:59 AM Thanks for that Suzy, you're a brave lady to support me here. I hope you understand my views and that I have no "hatred" towards homosexuals. I feel that there will always be a problem with sex between males, due to natural sex drive within most males. With heteros there is also a social "braking system" in the form of natural offspring and extended family structure, which is not available to homos. I, nor anyone else here can put forward any other explanation for the rates of sexual infection associated with the behaviour. Don, I have never ever ever said that 47% of homosexuals have hiv!...Where did you come up with that from? What I did say is that in all new infections of hiv, 47%(now 60%) are amongst male homosexuals.......that is completely different, but just as worrying, especially if one happens to be homosexual. I think you are becoming confused Don, I'm sure you do not intentionally lie. |
