Unleashed dog says it all......
.
The Pig’s Arms exists because almost two years ago our other favourite playpen – the ABC’s Unleashed blogsphere started to go off. Like a sack of prawn heads in the sun. Something had to be done.
Moderation was taking forever. Comments seemed to be rejected randomly – outrageous ones appeared and reasoned ones were pinged. When they released the Drum / Unleashed ….. things actually got worse !
So many pieces from professional writers appear with no obvious merit. And the moderation has become, to put it frankly, appalling.
As a former contributor and a commenter, I am deeply disappointed at the plummeting quality from our pre-eminent media empire. And I resent so many challenging or dare I say, witty or funny posts in which we’ve invested seconds of our precious time – getting the chop.
So here, for all our benefit – is an open slather blog. Copy and paste your best rejected comments here for posterity. And sprinkle pointers amongst your comments. Let’s try to rescue some of the old faithful.
Cheers,
Emm.
Poor child!
.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097279/Very-modern-custody-battle-Gay-father-court-battle-lesbians-access-boy-two.html
Unbelievable. My comment won’t get up anyway.
“I really don’t know anything about Syria, but, given recent events, I support the Russian and Chinese veto.”
Just occasionally one can get a belly laugh; just reading the serious articles.
What else that, ‘you don’t know anything about’, are you going to write about?
Hi, J.G, I see that Cezanne has eclipsed Pollack !
Sorry, Pollock.
Hello Funston,
Really?
How has the Old Master eclipsed the Young(er) one?
I can’t find the link now. I was perusing the world news and noticed that a country, Qatar, I think had paid $100m more than the last most expensive painting: a Pollock.
Five years ago I visited Musee D’Orsay and saw the Cezanne/Pissarrro exhibition. It was edifying for me: a dilettante-as I have admitted.
I remember that they were friends though.
We had lunch in the cafe upstairs where the old station clock is still prominent.
Hello Funston, My particular Modernist line starts with Cezanne and finishes with Pollock.
In between are late Monet, Picasso/Braque, the Italian Futurists, De Stijl, Mondrian and one or two more marginal chaps.
Cezanne is the place to start though…..
Do you recall the works?
Did you have any favourites?
I once saw 3 very special ones…….they belonged, I think, to the William Paley Collection.
I would be a fraud if I said that I recalled the paintings and then googled to promote my knowledge. As I wrote, I love the paintings but am not a buff. I read all of the descriptions next to them–then promptly forget them. Van Gogh ( why do Australians pronounce it Van Go?) had a good showing and I took a few photos (illegally), with my digital camera.
I read the life stories of Cezanne, Pizzarro and Monet. All prompted by my vist.
The Gallery/museum is quite a work itself. It is an ex station and has a sort of sunken floor and a gallery.
The interesting thing is/was that humans queue there to get in. Rows and rows of us. Just advancing slightly in the queue, which was wended snake like to the multipal entrances. Everyone patient and pleasant.
VL, someone is an expert in art, other person knows everything about Oz politics (WOW), or law ,Roman architecture…so, what, be what you are and do not worry about your lack of knowledge say, about German literature…
good or bad 
In the long run what matters most is what kind of person you are…
ABC 1 Helvi. You can see my dog walk from the elevated cameras.
To Funston, it is a wonderful thing that you were there….looking and wondering.
That is all one ever does….it’s all I ever do.
I was never really a fan of Van Gogh…..though I did I live for a short time behind his museum in Amsterdam…and found myself popping in on the way to the City. There was a little bar/cafe close by…..and the Moroccan Black was sold by the chocolate block size
Two shots of gin, a cup of tea, my cigarettes…..and some Black.
I was happy.
To Helvi, I cannot argue with your final line….and I try to do my best.
My parents had a nickname for me during my teens and twenties. I was called “the Snake” such was my temper. But those days are long gone……and now I only seem to snap in frustration on these blogs!!!!
And it’s always about the same thing.
Always.
And I can’t seem to shake it.
Anyway, lovely to talk to you both again
Has the place……settled a little?
Yes! Definitely less fractious.
What (if I may ask) were you doing in ‘Old Amsterdam’?
Were you a mouse?
I better post this. Otherwise only T2, will get the joke!
.
And I thought you were referring to “cheese”!!
Damn Funston, that clip is as old…as old….well, as old as you!
I was on my, how do you English say it?
Grand Tour!
That song (writer) is much older than I. In fact he’s brown bread now. I remember it though. It was a perennial. Standard fare for Max Bygraves, Val Doonican and Des O’Connor.
I was listening to the beach Boys and The Supremes.
The English, ‘Grand Tour’, was a lot more substantial than 9 months in a Combi, wearing the same vest
Think of David Niven (from Bembridge), in the film, ‘Around the world in 80 days’.
Waddya rekon, ║▬▬▬║elvi ?
Of course Picasso like, I could reduce it to ▬▬▬ , or even -.
There you go Helvi. H is now -. That was easy.
Vl, that’s fine me, make it into a dot, an ellipse, and I’m gone…
Nothing will ever eclipse Pierre Bonnard’s L’Indolente, remember…..
Here it is again..http://pigsarms.com.au/2010/02/07/lindolente-and-masterpieces-from-paris/
That was interesting. I just read all of the notes. Very “Obstetriceperous”
*
*Did you like my little portmanteau ??
VL, I rechecked the story…not too many art-loving Piglets
╠═╣ elvi, just because there are not many comments doesn’t mean that people don’t like art. Sometimes were too busy to comment.
And sometimes we couldn’t be bothered.
Don’t you agree ╠══╣elvi?
Or not? ╠═══╣ elvi?
Lol, VL, I’m not getting wider, I have lost some weight, all that walking…
VL, I put a smiley there just to indicate that I’m not too serious…
Have you noticed tho that anything about books, movies, plays on the Drum does not get many if any comments…I assume art is not terribly high on the list of interests in OZ.
Love that “H” Funston.
Mr Cole, that ‘H’ is disgusting, if anything Funston ought to narrow it, it’s starting to look like a double bed…
I think I’ll go into hiding, any suggestions for a good pseudonym…
PS Any success on The Drum today, JG?
hello Helvi
I quite like the “H”. the first of Funston”s creations is the best.
I have no suggestions Helvi……and no, no luck on the Drum.
I have no posts published for many days now…….
I grow discouraged……
Excuse my melancholy……….
and you?
Are you having any luck?
I see your name…..rarely.
Well you’re obviously doing something wrong J.G. Feet’s had about 7-10 up–out of 11.
VL, I had all mine up, I did not write too many as I’m getting terribly bored with the Drum, the same issues keep popping up, we have said all there is to be said.
╠▬▬╣ o ├───┤um
Well Syria, is very current! ├───┤elvi
■▫□□▫▪■
That’s Martian
Whatever VL, I’m sick and tired of the Drum, it does not make any difference that my Pseudo got on the soapbox a couple of times today…
ah Funston! You have too much time on your hands!
Lay some more pavers…..walk the dog……convert to the Left,
Anything!
Why did you mention Cowes? Some weeks ago now.
JG Cole, have you been able to convert anyone to the Left, I’m afraid I might have put some possible candidates off…
What about you Funston, have we had any influence on you
Anyhow, I have seen you both on the Drum today…funnily enough my posts popped up later, much later than they were sent…
There is a three speed left. The original one doesn’t exist–as there are no poor to be protected. So there is a token trade union movement that exist to benefit the officers and their lieutenants–and then there are the other two levels. People like Algy, Ato, gerad and Emmjay, who are drawn to the left, because they empathise with some of the recipients of bastardy that is part of the daily grind- and simply can’t stand wealthy people.
Then there are the wealthy academics, who have had plenty of time to luxuriate; reading books that sound as if the writers are logically correct. They identify, because it is almost a cause célèbre and they get comfort by bouncing their views of each other. Usually in like minded forums. They are hopelessly idealogic, putting up ideas that belong on wish lists. The problem being that they (one would think), should be the ones to do the hard yards and crunch the numbers-but in fact seem to get their knickers in a twist.
I’ve written this quickly, because I was intrigued to see what I would actually say in a quick response.
I suppose that I should add that “some” on the left appear to be sneering and promulgate a superior attitude. A sort of snobby, ‘we know better’. A bit like the landed gentry of yesteryear.
VL, I was never interested in politics, but as I ‘hated’ the Howard years,I do not want anyone like him ever as our leader…sorry to say, but Abbott would be even worse…
Helvi, have I been able to convert? sadly no. My point of argument with people comes much sooner than discussions of politics or ideology. a good example would be the long running battle with Ms Wilson and Mitor…….we argue about preliminaries, the substance seems so far away.
In my cynicism I would call it……a strategy.
It wasn’t me you saw today…….I posted several times, but none appeared.
6 days in a row, I think.
If this continues…..I shall retreat, gracefully.
Or perhaps pen a piece of my mind to that editor woman.
to Funston, I find your characterisation of the Left deeply troubling.
There is much truth to the cliches you point to…….there is also much fallacy.
as much as me trotting out those of the Right.
And so I am left to wonder what good this does.
I only put it up for discussion. As I said I wrote it on the sour of the moment.
It isn’t all true anyway. There are good and mendacious on each side.
There is not so much of a divide in The UK. Obviously they have tremendous problems. Many of them resulting from the open door policy of The Blair Government. They’ve admitted it now the various ministers just purposely allowed rampant influxes of migrants.
I should dig out the reference really to substantiate what I am writing. However, I feel a little weary today.
Here’s one link that I found quickly. But you get the picture:
http://livinginamadhouse.wordpress.com/2011/10/30/that-nulabour-mistake-over-mass-immigration-wasnt-a-mistake-non-shock/
The general public, in The South of England just argue about the rights and wrongs of the present government.They never discuss the opposition. And nobody would dream of boasting about who they voted for.
Live Astrange appeal. Streaming now!!
Don’t bother, unless you want a lesson in English law. With a lot of legal jargon and mumb-jumbo.
My comment was missed (in here) on the Richard Stanton blog. About Cyber Pubs
Vl, I saw your comment about cyber pubs somewhere, see, you do get noticed. I replied to you somehere, now I remember on Chris Bergh’s blog…you wrote under Feet Slipper, well, my reply is not there.
Actually, I posted as Grumpy Pom from The Dot !
VL, you were Feet Slipper on Bergh blog, and Grumpy Pom when you wrote about cyber pub…I got better memory than you, yours is not bad either, you a bit of a detective: )
You are up late Helvi. Better take Gerad in his hot milk and schnapps.
Helvi, hi. Regarding the MTR article:
I posted 2 responses to you. Personally.
I posted 3 to,Wilson. Personally.
I posted 3 to Mitor and Others.
none were published.
I even said something…….conciliatory and sympathetic to Wilson.
And there you have it.
does it get any more fuking awful than that???
Ah, there you are my friend(?), I was hoping for a reply from you (
), to no avail…
I do not understand why they let through so many unpleasant posts by some, but my sweet tries to defend anyone, myself, or some other downtrodden, don’t see the daylight…
I do feel sorry for Jennifer…it took me two weeks to get over the PA problems, and even if upsetting they were nothing compared what Jennifer has looming over her..
On the more happier note, there was some very nice, entertaining bloke posting on Gez’ blog, we were in stitches and stuff like that…most amusing…
There was someone else, who looks slightly familiar, she wears a dress…
Hi J.G, I’ve been lonely.
Hello Funston.,
Politically Incorrect :
26 Jan 2012 8:50:58am
All migrants up until the mid 20th century arrived by boat. Its not like there were 747′s in 1920 let alone 1800s
Hell how do you think James Cook came here? Virgin Blue?
IN A F*CKEN TINNIE, WITH AN ESKI IN THE BOW! Plonker!
Not only politically incorrect but also irrelevant.
I think I’ll take next door’s cat for a walk now.C.YA
I didn’t write that, don’t ya know?
Come back. I love you really Jayfa. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥
He’s gone to get his question manual, VL. Just wait a tick.
Still waiting LF !
Hmm… i’m still not convinced that rugby is natural.
Do you realise that all of your questions could be changed to – why…:
don’t I have a brother?
don’t we drive a lexus?
do I have brown skin?
do I get told off when I play. with barbie but my sister doesn’t?
can’t we go to church instead of mosque?
doesn’t dad speak english properly?
did mum die?
and so on, to the same effect.
you have yet to make a case as for why you think:
a) homosexuality is unnatural
b) homosexuals are incapable of reproduction
c) how a child being presented with a gay relationship will damage them
and just for kicks
d) why rugby is any more natural or any less gay than a homosexual couple
See Freud—-or Jung!
Goodness gracious, am I embarrassed!
If only I’d realised you were into psychoanalysis, or that you were in fact Hardon Collider!
I should have realised by the way you never managed to reply to my ‘interjections’, as it were. I would call them valid questions, but then again if I child asked me why he has two daddies I would count that as a valid question too – one to which I would reply with a well-reasoned, equally valid answer. Not with more questions, peppered with vague assertions. Or flat-out ignorance of the fact there was a question posed in the first place.
Well, on that epiphanous note, I’m going to waste my life on more pleasurable pursuits. Perhaps banging my head against a brick wall would fit the bill?
I’m out.
Hardon! I like that.
Goodnight and good luck with the head banging. Hopefully some sense will seep in.
Well, unnatural, is self explanatory. Even to you; trying to be contentious.
Try to think of Natural. Does that help?
Homosexuals can be impregnated and can impregnate…of course. But not by the person that they are married to ipso facto! Capiche? Is that not weird?
F..ken oath it is.
d) why rugby is any more natural or any less gay than a homosexual couple??
It is a game.
Games: pool, chess & monopoly
Am I to quick for you? Just let me know–and I’ll come back 2morow, Jay.
VL, you wrote some days ago ‘drooping dead’, I assumed it was a funny spelling mistake or a typo and replied that we have to do something about ‘that drooping’…my post came up but later on disappeared, maybe some old bloke took offence…
Caught them with their pants down. This is what they printed…
Labelling those that you named war criminals, is incorrect (at this stage)–which invalidates anything that you write.
The invasion of Iraq was the culmination of approx 20 years of Hussein’s crimes.
……………………………………………………..
And this is what I wrote:
Labelling those that you named war criminals, is incorrect (at this stage)–which invalidates anything that you write.
The invasion of Iraq was the culmination of approx 20 years of Hussein’s crimes.
What you appear to be supporting is that he (Hussein) should have been allowed another 8 years of killing, and THUSTLY, a marvellous succession to Uday: an even more vile creature.
Your ideas are contemptuous.
………………………………………..
What a bunch of ratbags. Obviously one of them is having sex with Ambrosia Raving. He/she, must be an ABC stooge journo!
NB for atomou. Of course thustly is an insulting remark to any articulate English writer. However, the moderator, wouldn’t have known that. They/it/she/he were just ripping the heart out of my message TOURETTES!!!!
Is that the first time you’ve had a post edited. I’ve had one or two, removes the whole context of the argument.
No, I’ve been edited before…but this was blatent rewriting. They allowed Mulga/Raving to say vile blah blah, however censored me. And in the process taking away the point that I was making.
I don’t want to discuss/argue about here, but I was asking him in a roundabout way, what he/she would hve proposed and how did we (the world) cope with, the, ‘quite obvious ongoing and worsening killing’.
Never mind. It seems one just can’t have a discussion there any more. In fact it has degenerated into a :get as many quick posts in as you can sport!
Maybe their reasoning is that posters will make just one well thought out comment and leave it at that. Well HAH, that is nonsense, because if’n one does, one’s post never appears!!
I hate this type of comment especialy as I am a rasict bigot womaniser
patarus
back in the early 70s Tharunka and Honi Soit were about three things Vietnam War/Conscription , Pornography and Homsexuality
the war stopped and so did conscription
pornography slowly became liberalised
homosexuality is known about but getting the other 90% over the line is a tad difficult
putting the intellectual and persuasive moralistic arguments and the political correctness to one side the bent on being “married” really detracts from coming out and being “different”.
i think the French have a contract type arrangement that even the heterosexual use because it gives a certain level of legalistic rights without convention
the aspect of convention is what has made our particular societies strong as it has clear and unequivocal definition
it is nearly a sin to be white these days as it is seen as a vitriolic being.
it also appears that being heterosexual is not good enough these days as well so one has to wonder why the tail keeps on wagging the dog
Reply
One day you will wake up and have something sensible to say. Lets just say that day has not arrived yet.
I am against young children being adopted, or produced by homosexuals. I believe that it is tantamount to grooming a child in an unnatural way. So marriage between homosexuals is unnatural too. One of the partners is pretending to be a husband or a wife: That’s plainly ridiculous.
Feet the speaker.
“Grooming,” “unnatural” “pretending” “husband,” “wife,” “ridiculous,” are all constructs of the imagination. In real terms, they mean bugger (oops!) all!
Are all the homosexuals “victims” of parental grooming? Is that why you think they are homosexuals?
Unnatural? Who on earth said that? A great chunk of the species -in nature- are homosexual. The act of having sex with someone of your own gender does not necessarily preclude you from being able to have sex with someone of the opposite gender. Nor is it unusual for a heterosexual person, male or female, to at some stage in their lives change proclivities. They change. Probably had enough of one type of sex and want to try another… they then are called “trysexuals” (try anything!)
I wouldn’t know, of course, but I suggest that in a homosexual act of sex, no one is pretending to be anything. They’re just having sex; and there are many ways of having sex, in both, homosexual and heterosexual couples… or triples… multiples.
The words “husband” and “wife” are almost out of circulation now. They have been replaced -many years ago- with the word “partner.” No one belongs, at least shouldn’t belong, to anyone else in a free society, as these terms suggest. “My husband” and “my wife” are flamboyant exhibitions of power. Delusions. Courts still need to do a bit more work on this but, I’d say they’re getting there, in spite of the ultra conservative political talibans like Abbott and Howard, Bernardi et al.
Ridiculous?
I can’t think of a more ridiculous word than ridiculous! You might want to use the word “offensive” because that’s how you really feel about it but that feeling, too, is bestowed upon you by virtue of our democracy. We all may feel what we like, so long as we don’t create laws that prohibit others from the same right.
I agree that the word partnership has crept into our ‘commonly used’ descriptions of relationships. Probably the fault of over population and too much spare cash to waste on glossy magazines about celebrities ect. And TV; promoting gratuitous violence and girl power–sex and the city–and scanty clothed heroes: AFL, Lady Gaga ect.
However, I am not homophobic and have know gays as friends and colleagues. My particular dislike is the grooming.
This is not a construct of my imagination, but a fact. Children that are exposed to their parents (snigger-parents), having homosexual acts are being, wrongly, conditioned to think that is normal–whereas it is unatural, no matter how many times you write that it isn’t.
This aspect of conditioning a young child is nauseous tome. That’s my point of view.
Onnce the marriage ‘word’ is eroded, the other part–the family part–becomes tainted too!
What would
MrsPartner (So Long As George Remains Hetero) At have to say about that I wonder?I haven’t really made my point because it would take some sheaves to expound. I was condensing all of my thoughts. For instance many partnerships are the result of failed marriages, not through any of the descriptions that I flippantly listed, but through genuine growing apart, and incompatibly. Although the failure rate could well be linked/influenced to/by overexposure of casual sex and objectivity of females in adverts and multimedia ?
However that doesn’t mitigate the point that homosexuals should get a marriage, because some heterosexual marriages fail
Lefties in The Dumb, decry the so called, ‘nuclear family’. I think that it has evolved naturally–and that the push for queers to marry and adopt children, will be yet another denigration that will be realised down the track.
Send them to Nauru….
Sorry, I didn’t answer that …”Are all the homosexuals “victims” of parental grooming? Is that why you think they are homosexuals?”
No I don’t think that. However, it’s a distinct possibility. Parental influence is important and paramount in conditioning. Take religion, or crime.
In conclusion, I have to say that I cannot see how anyone who has bought up children can condone it. It’s debasing a child’s upbringing and: abuse, in my view!
Voice, I think Partner Ato would find it quite disturbing if I were to somehow change my sexual predilections but she also knows that it is highly unlikely that this would happen. Be that as it may, what would I think if she had changed hers? I’d also think it rather irritating because we have established a damned wonderful life together as heteros. To start doing “new” things now would involve near-overwhelming mind changes. What I or she would feel, however is irrelevant to what other couples feel when they change, and that was what I wanted to point out. It is fairly common that this happens -from what I hear… ’round the marriage traps.
Laddie, what you’re blaming is the evolution of society. Almost every bit of what is “civic,” “civilisation” “polis” and “political” has evolved. It’s what happens to all organisms (organizations, organised societies). They evolve. They are the same but they evolve.
Words like “marriage” will disappear and, I suggest, words like “engaged” will remain only as little signs to show people that a dunny is out of bounds for a wee while.
I don’t like much of the turns that this evolution is taking -like porn shoved down our throats constantly, for example, and advertisements every five minutes on the telly, loud noise on radio and TV, pollution, etc. The intensity of religiosity, the ever-burgeoning desire to destroy whole populations with most horrible weaponry, totally unfettered greed, etc. And I neither accept them nor tolerate them. I hate them and I do what I can to eradicate them. But I daresay, they’ll be around for a little while longer. Little only because I think all this shit will destroy the whole human species, if not the planet itself.
Gay marriages? Well, whacko! Like someone said on the Drum, “if you don’t like gay marriage, then don’t gay marry!”
“Grooming” to be gay is less effective, and I daresay less dangerous than “grooming” to be a religious nutter!
http://richardtwaghorne.wordpress.com/2011/04/05/gay-marriage/
It’s the same old waffle, Hungsie! Waffle, dressed up as logic:
“But the reality is that marriages tend towards child-raising and same-sex partnerships do not.”
What on earth does he mean by this? “tend towards?” The fact that because some partnerships which he calls “marriages” tend towards child-raising does not preclude those other similarly called marriages from not doing any child-raising at all, or from doing it quite damned badly and I’ve come across an unconscionable number of such “marriages”.
The same with his view of “same-sex partnerships.” Why the change of words all of a sudden? Why is he now talking about “partnerships” and not marriages? And again, the implied word is “tend” (not to).
Very feeble logic.
He decries those proponents of gay marriage who call anti gay marriage as homophobes and bigots. Quite right. Some pro gay marriage people Do toss these terms about in abandon. They should be far more careful and it might well be that these people are themselves bigots. That does not detract for the pursued of equal rights in partnership, no matter what your sexual predilections are.
Nomenclature means nothing to me, Hungsie. Deeds do. And I feel that one of the measures of civilisation is the number of prejudicial deeds that it allows. Prejudice is a minus. Equality is a plus.
Richard Waghorne has no more right to force his view on others gays because he is gay, then heterosexuals do. If he is happy with what the Marriage Act has for him, then that’s fine. Other gays, obviously don’t. They feel discriminated against and I agree.
That’s all. Civilisation means that its laws should be just for all.
And please, don’t give me the lad’s view that “but, but, but, we’re NOT all equal! Some of us are 6 feet tall while others are only 3 foot midgets…” Nothing to do with equality n law.
Could not agree less Oh master. A child deserves a father and a mother, not two fathers or two mothers no matter how loved. Let’s start with, why do gays want to get married? The answer is because they do not have it. Like any child that goes to a cream bun shop, they want all the creams buns they can afford regardless of their obesity. Gays are a minority, the number of gays that want marriage is even less, so we now have to pander to a minority of minorities?
Now, let’s look at anatomy and physiology. The gay community defy all of these accepted concepts. Maybe you know better, being much more educated and intelligent man than me, however the rectum is designed to eliminate faeces, not designed to except an engorged penis as a means of penetration. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Now lets talk about love ato. I love you. You are a great guy with loads of intelligence, witty, thoughtful and articulate however I don’t want to root you up the arse. Ouzo, coffee, debate, conversation and spanokopitas will do fine.
Gays to marry, why?
You are simply a sea sponge, changing with the tide. Your rhetoric is based on someone else said that, not me”, Time you stood up for yourself atomou, my hero, I want you to be counted not discounted. You are trying to place yourself as a bet each way. Are you real or a phony?
Do go and check the comments posted on his silly essay. Some of them are most illuminating and tear a huge hole into his threadbare blanket of argument.
And what is the threadbare response “wheeze bean discriminated against…..” spew
I love when you really speak your mind there are no come backs, because here ain’t any
Silence is Golden
“Are you real or a phony?”
Hungsie, I didn’t think you needed to ask that question.
No I didn’t but you George, are judge and excommunication, ha ha, this is the only word my spell checker will accept, in one breath. You are my idol, you remind me of my own father, a man that could crush weaker IQ’s like swatting flies but chose not to. My dad, by the way, has a medal from the Greek government for his service on Crete, a captive eventually of the Germans.
C’mon, what have you got to say for yourself? has the pineapple sage got your tongue?
You ask if I am threadbare? I ask are you real or just an opponent to any sentiment expressed?
A couple of thoughts. Many years ago I used to say ‘what I really need is a wife’. Most of my married female friends wholeheartedly agreed.
I’m getting used to this ‘partner’ thing but in the beginning my first thoughts always went to ‘oh, they have a business together, accountants perhaps’. I really don’t think it is the best possible term. I tend to say ‘my daughter’s bloke’ but usually call him by his name.
I’m sticking with calling my hubby, hubby as some of you would probably make fun of his name.
It doesn’t matter what you call him, Vivie, so long as it’s not Lateforbreakfast.
Who knows what we’ll be calling each other in a century or two. We used to call some pretty disgusting drops, Champagne, here in Oz, not that long ago. And the yanks have a peculiar understanding about human anatomy when they talk of their fannies.
Nouns are plastic and adjectives are in the eyes of the beholder.
Eye!
Yes, I don’t know where the partner word originated. It’s just another erosion of male/female distinction in my view. Probably instigated by queers, to pave the way for their equality drive.
They’ll be wanting to snog in the street soon.
“They’ll be wanting to snog in the street soon.”
Zeus forfend!
Are you a mouse Ato?
Squeak, squeak
No, but I’m very busy Hung.
Are you a pussy?
A dick?
Don’t answer that today because I’ve got to go away and come back much later.
Late reply, I know, but I couldn’t help it.
I’m a tad confused here – you do know that being homosexual does not preclude one from reproducing?
You do know that homosexuals don’t groom children, but paedophiles do?
What do you mean by one of the partners pretending to be a husband or a wife?
To whom are you replying?
Bertie Wooster, was always groomed. A man can be a groom. Grooming horses? Grooming can be applied, BY ME, however I choose.
And I guess that is why most think of you as an arrogant, ignorant moron. Just joking Jules, wouldn’t want you to take any offence, just in case MJ or Voice are listening, I mean really you are great bloke, wouldn’t want to say otherwise….
AND: http://zeenews.india.com/entertainment/celebrity/gay-actor-wants-to-make-partner-his-husband_104223.htm
To your original comment, Vectis.
If there is plurality of meaning in your use of the term groom, then by all means, define them.
Not, now, Jayfa. He’s gotta take his dogs out for bark and a fark.
Before I take my dogs for their, and my, early constitution, let me just say, that I would have written, ‘define it’!
Grooming of course, as I have written elsewhere, is conditioning. Obviously!
“Give me the child (boy, I think) and I will give you the man”. In other words the early formative, impressionable years are important and to taint this prcious time by forcing a child to witness unnatural behaviour is IN MY VIEW, completely and utterly reprehensible, wrong and abusive. It is abusive of his/her’s human rights.!
@Vectis – I’m thankful for your explanation of the concept of grooming; it is always an awkward situation when everyone is on the same page apart from the person who picked it.
So, with the formalities of grooming out of the way, could you do me the courtesy of explaining to me what exactly is ‘unnatural behaviour is IN [YOUR] VIEW’?
I know that if I would like to see grown men embracing one another, slapping one another on the buttocks and calling each other names like sweetheart, I simply need to watch a live match of rugby or footy – I guess, what I’m trying to say here is that I’m having trouble figuring out what is unnatural: playing team sports with a ball or men touching each other.
@Atomou – Ah, yes. You know I can’t help but indulge myself every now and then. And it has been quite a while, hasn’t it?
Goodness me Jayfa, do I have to spell it out. The whole gamut of sexual interplay, phrases, euphemisms, endearments, stroking, kissing, sharing a bed.
Even asking questions!! Well there the rot/cancer really sets in doesn’t it.
Child: Hey Daddy and Daddy,(or Daddy and Mo, or Mummy, & Mummy whatever), The teacher at school talked about reproduction in biology, today…ect ect.
Or, my friends at kindergarten say that I must have a Mummy and a Daddy. What’s wrong with me?
Why haven’t you got ovaries Daddy?
Why is it that you both have willies and Jennifer’s Mum doesn’t . (Jennifer told the other child of course.) My teacher says that it is wrong for boys to kiss boys.
Where’s my Mummy…boo hoo, I want my Mummy.
WHERE”S MY MUMMY,I WANT MY MUMMY, EVERYBODY ELSE HAS ONE.
WHY CAN’T I HAVE ONE? BOO HOO BOO HOO.!!!
Really we shouldn’t even be discussing this. The whole idea is preposterous. I’ts just another example of selfishness. Children don’t choose to be born. They have a right to be bought up with a mother and a father.
What an EFFING joke!
NOW, I’m sur that you can think of an answer for the question s above. However, giving a rational answer about being queer to an adult is one thing, but giving it with to a child which is looking for love and guidance is skewing normality and I ma fervently against that.
I have written that quickly, so apologies for any spelling mistakes or bad grammar
Oh, laddie!
Reading your extrications is like reading the script of a standup comedian!
I remember seeing loads of self help books devoted on the question, “daddy where did I come from?”
Something tells me that parents are so much wiser these days, that there’ll be no need for any of those books. All you need to do is be honest with them. Tell them what’s going on. Tell them that it’s quite normal for parents to be gay. That there’s no need for anyone to have a willie or a tillie or a whatsamacallit!
It’s ok, lad. It really is ok. I have taught many students with gay parents (actually, come to think of it, they were all male, no female gays that I can remember) and those students were perfectly ok. No… shall we say, gay-related problems.
It really will be ok, ok?
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/43756.html
Here’s what I wrote as Hadron Collider…With some interjections by Jayfa…
Atomou wrote: ” Tell them that it’s quite normal for parents to be gay”.
Really that’s poppycock (excuse the pun
) It is NOT natural. You are in serious need of help.
Actually you have inadvertently helped my case. It was the sort of phraseology that I was searching for. Ta muchly Ol Bean …!
Off to walk the dogs. At least they have higher IQs than Wayne and sugar daddy Bill Earwig.
And for you to think that your dogs have a higher IQ, it means that you have even a lower one!
Get off your stool, Lad! You’ve been in there far too long!
Actually, we’re back now. They ran and swam in the lake. Then barked, four legs good two legs bad!
I’ve no idea what they meant. Do you think that Napoleon Earwig does?
Dumbing-down our political leaders.
The dumbest leader is Julia Gillard. Who would go on television with ginger hair?
There’s nothing voluntary about addiction
Ban the EEFFFING things.
Gay marriage: a step on the journey, not the destination.
Why don’t the gay marriage promoters start using their bums as nature intended?
Feet Slipper
Feet, you need a foot to make a step and a step to begin a journey.
When governments are so up themselves that they will go all the way to amputating your feet, then you cannot take that first step.
I guess the gays didn’t bother to read the manual that was handed to each of them by mother nature when they were born.
Two front page hits on the Drum in one go. I have a friend there today.
Where?
Ha!
I got one up too!
If only you two would stop writing such unmitigated rubbish
I would like a new section: entitled the posts that we would like t write, but know WONT get published.
I thought that this is what this pub is about. Go for it, lad!
Can’t see this one getting up on the cricket blog
Well that is Melbourne isn’t it. What did Seinfeld say, Melbourne is the haemorrhoid on the arsehole of the earth. Lets face it you are all too interested in who is going to stimulate Shane Warne’s penis to actually do anything effective.
Isn’t it amazing Hung did not get one post up on the Margaret Court article yet under another name saying the same thing he did