Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Reginald Ret

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 207
So, anyone remember Andrea Dworkin?  Looks like someone's giving her some competition.


Intercourse is the very means through which men oppress us, from which we are not allowed to escape, yet some instances of or PIV and intercourse may be chosen and free? That makes no sense at all.

As FCM pointed out some time ago, intercourse is inherently harmful to women and intentionally so, because it causes pregnancy in women.

PIV is a man mounting on a woman to thrust a large member of himself into her most intimate parts, often forcing her to be entirely naked, banging himself against her with the whole weight of his body and hips, shaking her like he would stuff a corpse, then using her insides as a receptacle for his penile dejection.
Member either means limb or penis. specifying large member implies that either the penis is bigger than the other members or that the man is thrusting an arm or leg into her most intimate parts. The 'she is doing sex wrong' argument is getting stronger.

Body and hips?! Apparently my hips are not a part of my body. Is this only true for men or for women as well?

Through an all-pervasive and powerful male propaganda, they stuff our minds from infancy with the idea that PIV is normal, desirable and erotic, before we can even conceive of it as something horrifying, and make sure we never see any alternative to their lie – or that if we do, we can no longer take in the information, are punished for thinking and saying otherwise.
Overestimating male competence here.

Infancy? WTF? The 'she had sex done to her wrong' argument just surpassed the 'she is doing sex wrong' argument by several orders of magnitude.

I'm taking Dorfl's stance on this one:

“Another priest said,"Is it true you've said you'll believe in any god whose existence can be proved by logical debate?"


Vimes had a feeling about the immediate future and took a few steps away from Dorfl.

"But the gods plainly do exist," said a priest.

"It Is Not Evident."

A bolt of lightning lanced down through the clouds and hit Dorfl's helmet. There was a sheet of flame and then a trickling noise. Dorfl's molten armour formed puddles around his white-hot feet.

"I Don't Call That Much Of An Argument," said Dorfl calmly, from somewhere in the clouds of smoke.”


Lets say that Stonehenge was, in fact, made completely brand new in the 1890s-1900s. That might be a little disappointing on some level but it would not actually challenge my worldview much at all. A large amount of British national identity and history is basically made up wholecloth. It definitely wouldn't change how I think of my government or my country at all.

Now, the convincing evidence that seems to indicate a deep-rooted set of individuals engaging in child abuse at the heart of government, and the complicity of the national security agencies in covering that up? The fact it seems to have been an 'open secret' amongst the tory cabinet of the 1980s. That fucking Jimmy Saville, beloved children's entertainer and national treasure, was in fact some sort of horrifying paedophile rapist gangster?

These are things which actually surprised me and shocked my worldview when they were revealed. Who gives a shit about a pile of rocks when the rotten core of our very way of life has been so gruesomely exposed? We British were supposed to be better than that. Decency and respectability were supposed to be important to us, especially in our public servants.

So, no. You're looking for your 'forgeries' in the wrong places. The lies that form the basis of our society are much bigger ones than 'Stonehenge was made by ancient people'.

They are lies like:

"All are equal before the eyes of the law."
"If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear."
"It wouldn't happen over here."

Well said!

I was hoping I could come up with a similar quote-lie, but my memory failed me so instead you get a Sage Francis lyric.

"our God is bigger, stronger, smarter and much wealthier
So wave those flags with pride, especially the white part"

Others will have to pick up my slack.

A male feminist was going on a tirade about how we should all use "she" as the default pronoun when we don't know the gender of a party to stick it to the patriarchy. When I disagreed, the words "you can't know what it's like to be a woman in this society" came out of his mouth. At me.

There were no survivors.

An interesting little piece of research: Cephalopods have no identifiable sex chromosomes. So how would you even know your gender?

I assume they survived.
I'm glad you had fun and that it ended this way instead of the other ways it could have ended.


Thanks! The figuring out a way to pluralise and add tenses to GRIN was tough.

You might even say an intense process.
But that would be puning, and therefore punishable.

... I think it's punny anyway.

 :oops: I really gotta stop now.

GRIN'n works quite well, good find!


She speaks of familiar subjects that I care about greatly.
Very interesting, and strong personality.

Connection is Colorado. Which legalized weed. Then pretend you work for Fox News. The outcome would be the post.
Ah, thanks. I get it now.

This is what happens when you legalize marijuana in Colorado
I don't understand the connection between your post and the story in the link.

There is no mention of marijuana, weed or ganja in the article or in the comments.
There is no link between any of the subjects in that story and weed, neither in commonly hold beliefs or statistical correlation (at least, none that I know of).

Please explain.

Something's wrong with my butt.
Nurture it and it will grow.

If someone is nice enough to give you something you should probably just say thank you.
I have mountains of worn out clothing. If I were to give them all to you, would you thank me for using you as a dumping ground?

Well I don't make a habit of upsetting mentally ill people, so... :lulz:

what about when gramma gives your kid a drumset?
Depending on your sensitivity to sound this can be either a good gift or a bad gift. Either way you didn't get a choice.
If you don't want your gramma to do such things again then I advise talking to her, call me crazy.

If someone is nice enough to give you something you should probably just say thank you.
I have mountains of worn out clothing. If I were to give them all to you, would you thank me for using you as a dumping ground?

What if the gift was counterfeit, passing itself as real?
Does it seem bad but turns out to be awesome or the other way around?

"Free" implies the absence of manipulation, so say "Thank you," accept, and move on.

Your question obviously presumes more devious intent, though.
I don't think manipulation matters, in both situations I am left with something I don't want.
What do I do with the unwanted item?
Am I allowed to give feedback to the giver or am I supposed to accept any pile of crap and say thank you?

You comment made me rethink my question.
If 'Free'  implies no cost in any form (for example angering the giver by refusing) then in the OP I called it an offer, not a gift. So a free gift is by definition an offer.
That changes my question to 'Are free gifts better than gifts with an expectation of thanks?'
That is quite a bit simpler to answer, thanks for clarifying.

Someone gives you the clap and doesn't invoice you.

You still get to bitch.

Another cost that can be attached to a gift.
Here the previous point applies as well, the clap is never free of cost.

Didn't Nigel have a thread a while back on this subject?
She did, I forgot about it. :oops:
Thanks for reminding me, hers was a very interesting thread.
I will try to find it later, I gotta get back to work.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 207