|
Post by june on Aug 23, 2010 16:12:02 GMT
;D. I did miss that point, mainly because you didn't make it I don't find c..t offensive at all - I find the assumption I will faint of someone uses it offensive ;D Nobody said anything about fainting.You miss the point completely. It's only because (some) men within our culture despise women so much that 'cunt' can be used as an insult. I'm absolutely in favour of the word being used - reclaimed, if you like - as it was by feminist artists in the 1970s: www.brooklynmuseum.org/exhibitions/dinner_party/Or of women using it in celebration of their own sexuality. That's not compatibile with it being used as the nastiest insult anyone can think of.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 23, 2010 16:31:42 GMT
I realise it was unwise for me to use the word offensive, because for many posters on this board it's shorthand for 'I have decided to indulge myself in being offended'.
But since I did mention that the grounds for my objection was that 'cunt' means women's genitals, and I don't like to see a word for women's genitals used as an insult, I should have thought I wasn't that obscure.
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Aug 23, 2010 16:46:10 GMT
am not with this at all....there has to be more to being a woman than a sex part...there has to be a damned sight more to celibrate than whats between the legs not into all this celebrating sexuality guff....and some men in every society despise women...justs as some women despise men......as for their own sexuality..every one has their own sexuality cant see why or whats to celebrate..all very odd Celebrating sexuality, as if that is all a woman consists of.... Until recently, women were not supposed to have any sexuality at all (women outside porn, that is). So, celebrating the fact that you enjoy sex, without it making you seem like a psychiactric case (I think there are some women still in psychiatric hospitals for having masturbated in their youth - they've been there so long that they can't be released now), is a wholly positive thing. This goes for everyone, really. For straight men, sex was something shameful, something that you did to a woman, which she must not enjoy; and for gay men and women it was especially shameful, and for men, illegal. Say what you like, things are better now. Jean. I will use that word as an insult: but it is nearly always a friendly insult - me any my brother use it to each other a fair bit. And prick is someone stupid, bollocks means utter rubbish, etc. These are used so often that they are hardly thouight of as swearing now. You really can't claim special treatment here. Mouse - Fairport Convention were/are an English Folk rock group. They even perform with Morris dancers sometimes. I would love to see Dervishes.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 23, 2010 17:56:12 GMT
am not with this at all....there has to be more to being a woman than a sex part...there has to be a damned sight more to celibrate than whats between the legs not into all this celebrating sexuality guff....and some men in every society despise women...justs as some women despise men......as for their own sexuality..every one has their own sexuality cant see why or whats to celebrate..all very odd Celebrating sexuality, as if that is all a woman consists of.... Until recently, women were not supposed to have any sexuality at all (women outside porn, that is). So, celebrating the fact that you enjoy sex, For straight men, sex was something shameful, something that you did to a woman, which she must not enjoy; and for gay men and women it was especially shameful, and for men, illegal. Say what you like, things are better now. Mouse - Fairport Convention were/are an English Folk rock group. They even perform with Morris dancers sometimes. I would love to see Dervishes. fantastic aubrey,,absolutly fantastic..was the real thing too not the tourist performance... i once looked into the origins of morris dancers..far from the efete performances of today,,,maypole dancing too no wonder cromwell and the puritans banned it oh i think history makes it clear that women have enjoyed sex since forever its not a new thing..queen victoria is a case in point..though she resented the high price of being pregnant for many women it was the getting pregnant which put the mockers on sex..the fear of getting pregnant or getting pregnant yet aagain....child bearing being a dangerous ocuptation and its the birth control we have that has enabled many women to not fear the results of sex...and of course a great deal of women pleasure depends on the man she is with... mind you...a lot of women still pretend...that all is well when it isnt[locker room talk] a friend of mine has always held that there is no such thing as a fridgid woman...only incometant men who dont know how to please[i may add she is very happily married and not a man hater
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 23, 2010 17:57:47 GMT
I and I don't like to see a word for women's genitals used as an insult,. neither do i....
|
|
|
Post by june on Aug 23, 2010 18:06:57 GMT
I realise it was unwise for me to use the word offensive, because for many posters on this board it's shorthand for 'I have decided to indulge myself in being offended'. But since I did mention that the grounds for my objection was that 'cunt' means women's genitals, and I don't like to see a word for women's genitals used as an insult, I should have thought I wasn't that obscure. You didn't say that either Jean - you said it was offensive, full stop. It may be offensive to you (as you now say) but you don't speak for all woman kind, do you.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 23, 2010 18:16:18 GMT
i think most of us can find some thing can be offensive yet not be personally offended......yes...no
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 23, 2010 18:33:28 GMT
You didn't say that either Jean - you said it was offensive, full stop. What I originally wrote was: But it is very offensive indeed to use any word denoting women's genitalia as an insult.As you can see, the 'full stop' comes after my reasons for objecting. I've agreed that 'offensive' was a poor choice of word, and I've said why. But there is nothing there about 'fainting'. You've read that into my post, june; I didn't put it there.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 23, 2010 18:43:26 GMT
I realise it was unwise for me to use the word offensive, because for many posters on this board it's shorthand for 'I have decided to indulge myself in being offended'. You mean you haven't
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 23, 2010 18:44:19 GMT
You didn't say that either Jean - you said it was offensive, full stop. What I originally wrote was: But it is very offensive indeed to use any word denoting women's genitalia as an insult.As you can see, the 'full stop' comes after my reasons for objecting. I've agreed that 'offensive' was a poor choice of word, and I've said why. But there is nothing there about 'fainting'. You've read that into my post, june; I didn't put it there. So if I say Cameron is a tit.....
|
|
|
Post by june on Aug 23, 2010 19:51:03 GMT
i think most of us can find some thing can be offensive yet not be personally offended......yes...no maybe Mouse but Jean wasn't making that point either ;D
|
|
|
Post by june on Aug 23, 2010 19:57:07 GMT
You didn't say that either Jean - you said it was offensive, full stop. What I originally wrote was: But it is very offensive indeed to use any word denoting women's genitalia as an insult.As you can see, the 'full stop' comes after my reasons for objecting. I've agreed that 'offensive' was a poor choice of word, and I've said why. But there is nothing there about 'fainting'. You've read that into my post, june; I didn't put it there. Actually Jean keep your knickers on. I meant full stop figuratively (as in end of story) not literally as in where you place your punctuation. ;D You are the one obsessed with me suggesting that you said something about fainting. For clarity's sake: You didn't, therefore I have never claimed you did. I said it, in my own words, like a big girl, relating to me and my opinions. T'was a little bon jest. I can do that you know - type my own posts and not rely on parroting back what other people have said - which is a peculiar trait of this board and very tedious in my opinion. Sometimes I feel as if I have read nothing but the opening post on a thread some 50 messages long.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 23, 2010 20:47:16 GMT
I'm not obsessed with anything. I'd actually rather you quoted me (or 'parroted back' if you prefer) what I'd said rather than make it up, if you don't mind.
|
|
|
Post by june on Aug 23, 2010 20:58:09 GMT
I'm not obsessed with anything. I'd actually rather you quoted me (or 'parroted back' if you prefer) what I'd said rather than make it up, if you don't mind. Jean You have said several times that you never mentioned fainting and chastised me for saying you had said it. Well, as the posts show, I never suggested that you did say that. You chose to interpret my post in a most peculiar way. I have no idea why you did that and frankly cannot pretend to care.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 23, 2010 21:45:49 GMT
Aubrey, it is not offensive to women to use that word with its proper meaning. But it is very offensive indeed to use any word denoting women's genitalia as an insult. I don't find c..t offensive at all - I find the assumption I will faint if someone uses it offensive] I am sorry if I misunderstood your reply to my post; but who did you think was making the 'assumption' you found offensive?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 23, 2010 21:51:21 GMT
has any one sugested that racism doesnt exist ?? ..i cannot remeber ANYONE saying that ..and who and where are ALL these people who are saying racism doesnt exist OK. Where are all the racists? In all my messageboard arguments, even with people who say that all black people/Muslims etc ought to be expelled from the country, have I ever come across anyone who will admit to being racist. Not even those people who say that black people are more disposed than whites to commit crime say that they're not racist. Even that Nick Griffin out of the BNP says he's not racist. In fact, the only person I've ever seen on a messageboard who admits to being racist - in the sense of having the occassional racist thought - is me. Apart from that one case (me), racists are always very bad people, and always someone else.very simple lad. those you describe are NOT racists. your delusions do not change reality. it is those who call the people who have a grip on reality racists, such as yourself, that are the racists
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 23, 2010 21:54:47 GMT
see? there you go with the ignorant "studies" stupidity again. What is wrong with ‘ignorant studies’? In what way are such ‘studies’ merely ‘stupidity’? Why is attempting to understand our society and culture ‘stupid’? You have implied that ‘taking offence’ is a psychical flaw, yet when challenged on this simple premise, you are unable to detail your findings. You are totally unable to prove your premise. Why is that? Why are you so unable to prove your deeply held belief? Can you possibly explain why you are unable to find anything recorded in science that backs up your psychological analysis? Could it be that your cod psychology has a net value of ‘ZERO’? From here, it looks like exactly like that. it is really sad that you have to have someone else tell you what to think And with that you expose your entire mental shortcomings. This isn’t about what to ‘think’, this about what you understand. In order to come to a conclusion about anything, you first need to understand the parameters of the the issue under discussion. Clearly you are singularly incapable of thinking of anything. You a re simply regurgitating things you have heard before an attempting to pass it of as an original thought. However, when questioned, you are unable to back up what you have stated. i certainly do thank you for conclusively proving me right.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 23, 2010 21:57:42 GMT
see? there you go with the ignorant "studies" stupidity again. What is wrong with ‘ignorant studies’? In what way are such ‘studies’ merely ‘stupidity’? Why is attempting to understand our society and culture ‘stupid’? You have implied that ‘taking offence’ is a psychical flaw, yet when challenged on this simple premise, you are unable to detail your findings. You are totally unable to prove your premise. Why is that? Why are you so unable to prove your deeply held belief? Can you possibly explain why you are unable to find anything recorded in science that backs up your psychological analysis? Could it be that your cod psychology has a net value of ‘ZERO’? From here, it looks like exactly like that. it is really sad that you have to have someone else tell you what to think And with that you expose your entire mental shortcomings. This isn’t about what to ‘think’, this about what you understand. In order to come to a conclusion about anything, you first need to understand the parameters of the the issue under discussion. Clearly you are singularly incapable of thinking of anything. You a re simply regurgitating things you have heard before an attempting to pass it of as an original thought. However, when questioned, you are unable to back up what you have stated. i certainly do thank you for conclusively proving me right, yet again. once again, you prattle on with your meritless parroting. do you anticipate that there will EVER come a time when you will be able to form a coherent thought on your own, rather than regurgitate inane lunacy that you happened to read in some book?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 23, 2010 22:09:26 GMT
What is wrong with ‘ignorant studies’? In what way are such ‘studies’ merely ‘stupidity’? Why is attempting to understand our society and culture ‘stupid’? You have implied that ‘taking offence’ is a psychical flaw, yet when challenged on this simple premise, you are unable to detail your findings. You are totally unable to prove your premise. Why is that? Why are you so unable to prove your deeply held belief? Can you possibly explain why you are unable to find anything recorded in science that backs up your psychological analysis? Could it be that your cod psychology has a net value of ‘ZERO’? From here, it looks like exactly like that. And with that you expose your entire mental shortcomings. This isn’t about what to ‘think’, this about what you understand. In order to come to a conclusion about anything, you first need to understand the parameters of the the issue under discussion. Clearly you are singularly incapable of thinking of anything. You a re simply regurgitating things you have heard before an attempting to pass it of as an original thought. However, when questioned, you are unable to back up what you have stated. i certainly do thank you for conclusively proving me right, yet again. once again, you prattle on with your meritless parroting. do you anticipate that there will EVER come a time when you will be able to form a coherent thought on your own, rather than regurgitate inane lunacy that you happened to read in some book? "you prattle on with your meritless parroting."
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Aug 23, 2010 22:31:50 GMT
Dr. Laura tells Larry King and others why she is stopping her talk show! Losing her talk show, one of my favorites, is reason enough to try to take the power out of the stupid "n-word"!
|
|