Do you have Liberal views or Conservative views

[Desert Region]

I can sense some dreadful comment or point around the corner.

A large number of suicides are among gay people.

Every ****ing time! You're obsessed with that. Do you have an alert sent to your phone every time the figure is updated? How long before you start talking yet again about the suicide rate among young gay people? Is this what you like to daydream about when you're not thinking about a "woman who has found herself pregnant after being raped being forced to take care of her rapists child" or "women having their lips sewn up"?

Bugger off back to the BNP, you callous, exploitative, trauma-porn weirdo.

[Toodles McGinty]

Actually I am a male today - might change tomorrow again though.

During pre-war time, life was hard and money was hard to come by. Everyone who needed anything had to work hard for it. Just after the war, times were still not easy, and still people had to work hard for anything they wanted. Many people really had to struggle. There were standards which had to be maintained. Then in the late fifties, people realised that the hard times were easing and life became easier. Dancing, parties, drugs, flower power propagated by the media and a more liberalistic lifestyle started and standards dropped. After which lifestyles once again declined. In the seventies and eighties, people were once again struggling, there were many protests, many strikes and life again was difficult under Thatchers monetarism economy which continued with Heath and is still very much in use today. Loans and loans and more loans. This liberalistic approach of free flowing money does not work it leads to stagnation.

Bullshite. Poor people have always had to struggle. Which 'standards' had to be maintained?

'Dancing'? WTF? Nobody danced before 1957? The Devil's work, obvs.

You're obsessed with 'the war'. Something you didn't live through. Something you've read about in history books. Your version of history is the 'Dad's Army' theme tune. Crank.

Liberal views - A Cashier in Tesco's is paid the same wage as a warehouseman...
...so under equality they are given pass marks. Conservatism means that those who cannot absorb necessary information to the standard required would be useless for careers in that field.

Again, crank. So in the 'liberal' 60s, all sports ended in a draw, all students got the exact same exam results and all jobs paid the same? Because of 'dancing' and drugs. Might be aubergines. Not many aubergines around until the late 50s / early 60s. Could be that.

More than half transvestites have served prison sentences.

Citation? How could you possibly know how many transvestites there are? In the words of 'Dad's Army':

Mr Brown Goes Off To Town
On The Eight Twenty-One
But He Comes Home Each Evening
And He Slips His Wife's Bra On...

It is entirely impossible to know how many men (or women) enjoy donning the clothes of the opposite sex. And why would transvestites want to change their hormones? I don't think Grayson Perry needs HRT to wear a pair of tights.

And who is to say what are 'male' and 'female' clothes? A few hundred years ago men wore skirts or tights, and trousers didn't exist. Men wore make up and wigs. Men wore high heels. The 'suit and tie' modern man is a fairly recent construct. I'd say, as in most situations, those who rail against that they see as 'wrong' in others have a few skeletons rattling round the darkest corners of their closets.

A large number of suicides are among gay people. Failures upon failure for those with liberalistic views.

Change the record, crank. Desert Region's post is absolutely spot on.

[said]

Every ****ing time! You're obsessed with that. Do you have an alert sent to your phone every time the figure is updated? How long before you start talking yet again about the suicide rate among young gay people? Is this what you like to daydream about when you're not thinking about a "woman who has found herself pregnant after being raped being forced to take care of her rapists child" or "women having their lips sewn up"?

Bugger off back to the BNP, you callous, exploitative, trauma-porn weirdo.

What sort of a crank are you? There were several examples given! It is YOU who are obsessed since you singled out one fact, and one fact only! Obviously you must be on the bottle again, you are not sane. Bloody lunatic!

Ditto my response to Seivad - it applies to you too.

[said]

As Toodles says, the regularity with which she returns to the same old questions as an opportunity to air her vile views is tedious.

On the question of transgendered men in women's changing rooms... no doubt she believes that they are really paedophiles dressed as women, or willy waving heterosexual guys intent on attacking unsuspecting females.

She should emigrate to one of the deep red Southern States in the US. It's 2021 and the Equal Rights Amendment, first tabled in the 1920s, still hasn't been passed at the Federal level. In the 70s, one of the reasons given was the opportunity gender neutral washrooms would provide for men to dress as women and sexually assault women. The more progressive states have legislated their own ERA, but those Southern belles are having none of it.

I don't think that JoMar AKA Norah should worry. Unless Compo is alive and well, and sneaking into Southport women's facilities dressed as a woman, she'll be quite safe.

Before you even begin typing - ask yourself, "Am I competent enough to respond intelligently" It is so very common for three posters to spuriously respond to topics without having any knowledge nor the ability to do so, which is reflected glaringly in your personal abuse. Which, I may add, does not earn you any Brownie points! Do more reading and less drinking!

A high education is not required, but in your case, a higher education would be very beneficial.

In The Road to Serfdom, published in 1944, Hayek argued that government planning, by crushing individualism, would lead inexorably to totalitarian control. Like Mises’s book Bureaucracy, The Road to Serfdom was widely read. It came to the attention of some very wealthy people, who saw in the philosophy an opportunity to free themselves from regulation and tax. When, in 1947, Hayek founded the first organisation that would spread the doctrine of neoliberalism – the Mont Pelerin Society – it was supported financially by millionaires and their foundations.
With their help, he began to create what Daniel Stedman Jones describes in Masters of the Universe as “a kind of neoliberal international”: a transatlantic network of academics, businessmen, journalists and activists. The movement’s rich backers funded a series of thinktanks which would refine and promote the ideology. Among them were the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Institute of Economic Affairs, the Centre for Policy Studies and the Adam Smith Institute. They also financed academic positions and departments, particularly at the universities of Chicago and Virginia.
As it evolved, neoliberalism became more strident. Hayek’s view that governments should regulate competition to prevent monopolies from forming gave way – among American apostles such as Milton Friedman – to the belief that monopoly power could be seen as a reward for efficiency.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...george-monbiot
https://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tr...e/view/750/795
https://www.theweek.co.uk/94184/what-is-neoliberalism

[said]

Bullshite. Poor people have always had to struggle. Which 'standards' had to be maintained?

'Dancing'? WTF? Nobody danced before 1957? The Devil's work, obvs.

You're obsessed with 'the war'. Something you didn't live through. Something you've read about in history books. Your version of history is the 'Dad's Army' theme tune. Crank.



Again, crank. So in the 'liberal' 60s, all sports ended in a draw, all students got the exact same exam results and all jobs paid the same? Because of 'dancing' and drugs. Might be aubergines. Not many aubergines around until the late 50s / early 60s. Could be that.




Citation? How could you possibly know how many transvestites there are? In the words of 'Dad's Army':

Mr Brown Goes Off To Town
On The Eight Twenty-One
But He Comes Home Each Evening
And He Slips His Wife's Bra On...

It is entirely impossible to know how many men (or women) enjoy donning the clothes of the opposite sex. And why would transvestites want to change their hormones? I don't think Grayson Perry needs HRT to wear a pair of tights.

And who is to say what are 'male' and 'female' clothes? A few hundred years ago men wore skirts or tights, and trousers didn't exist. Men wore make up and wigs. Men wore high heels. The 'suit and tie' modern man is a fairly recent construct. I'd say, as in most situations, those who rail against that they see as 'wrong' in others have a few skeletons rattling round the darkest corners of their closets.



Change the record, crank. Desert Region's post is absolutely spot on.

It would be - and because of that the same response I have given to Desert Region and Sievad applies to you too. You have all once again gone 'off topic' in order to run your abusive mouths off. What nasty people you must be and you all have the cheek to criticise others.

You, Desert Region and Sievad have commandeered the post as an excuse for your vile rants again. It is tiresome and boring and does not appeal to other posters.

[said]

Abortion. You ask do you agree with it and if yes you then ask should a woman carrying a rapists child be forced not to abort.

If you agree the issue wouldn't arise the woman would be free to chose, if you disagree it could then be an issue.
Do try to think out what you are typing and if it is too difficult ask a grown up, Ejit!

Thank you for pointing out the error - albeit rather rudely, but you have taken the trouble to think about it.

[Toodles McGinty]

It would be - and because of that the same response I have given to Desert Region and Sievad applies to you too. You have all once again gone 'off topic' in order to run your abusive mouths off. What nasty people you must be and you all have the cheek to criticise others.

We've stayed absolutely on topic. 'Standards', 'Liberal 60s', 'Transvestites'. You brought them up. As you do ad nauseum. Along with your other favourites 'rape' and 'gay suicide'. Over and over.

You, Desert Region and Sievad have commandeered the post as an excuse for your vile rants again. It is tiresome and boring and does not appeal to other posters.

Nobody has 'commandeered' anything. We've responded to your posts. Don't post if you don't want responses. Or if you only want responses that agree with you.

And I'm in very good company, then.

[silver fox]

It would be - and because of that the same response I have given to Desert Region and Sievad applies to you too. You have all once again gone 'off topic' in order to run your abusive mouths off. What nasty people you must be and you all have the cheek to criticise others.

You, Desert Region and Sievad have commandeered the post as an excuse for your vile rants again. It is tiresome and boring and does not appeal to other posters.

You really are deluded, just look at the responses you get, you won’t need any fingers to count your supporters, if you don’t like the responses you get, go find a forum which tallies with your irrational prejudice.

[said]

You really are deluded, just look at the responses you get, you won’t need any fingers to count your supporters, if you don’t like the responses you get, go find a forum which tallies with your irrational prejudice.

Whoops! Make that four! I do like the responses from the rational people who make up most of the people on this site. Unfortunately, there are a group - a known group of cyber bullies - who have upset and lost more valuable and humorous posters on the site over the years, than who have joined.

So who do you think should be reconsidering their responses? Have you ever known me to use personal abuse? Obscene language? Personal attacks on people outside the British eccentricities? Have I joined with other people for cyber bullying? Have I ever insulted people? Have I ever criticised those who post sensibly?
Think about it?

[sandGroundZero]

Do you have Liberal views or Conservative views No I am not talking about Political Parties. Do you believe in, for example equality? Or do you believe that certain lines should not be crossed?

…Nobody has 'commandeered' anything. We've responded to your posts. Don't post if you don't want responses. Or if you only want responses that agree with you. …

It appears as though the problem here is that no one discerned said's intention, namely, a discourse on 'neo-liberalism ' as an abstract framework for the analysis of …well, life

Life! Don't talk to me about life.

— Marvin (Douglas Adams),
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

— No wonder s/he is pi$$ed off!

This forum is clearly too low-brow.

[seivad]

Before you even begin typing - ask yourself, "Am I competent enough to respond intelligently" It is so very common for three posters to spuriously respond to topics without having any knowledge nor the ability to do so, which is reflected glaringly in your personal abuse. Which, I may add, does not earn you any Brownie points! Do more reading and less drinking!


A high education is not required, but in your case, a higher education would be very beneficial.

Here we go again, accuse someone of drinking if you don't like what they have to say. Compared to your incoherent factually and grammatically challenged missives, I would hazard a guess that the majority of people would question your competence to reply, not mine.

It's none of your business, but I'll be damned if I'll allow you to accuse me of being a lush. I don't drink. Since my husband had 60% of his liver removed due to cancer, meaning no alcohol for him ever again, I have chosen to support him by doing likewise.

Again, none of your business... I have an undergraduate and post graduate degree and a professional designation. Not that post secondary academic qualifications are the definitive mark of intelligence or knowledge. A curious mind, a thirst for knowledge, and the ability to read and comprehend, are an indication of exactly the same qualities. Suffice to say that, sadly, I see no evidence of these qualities in your contributions.

Your son may have a higher education, but you can't benefit from it by osmosis.

[gsgsgs]

Whoops! Make that four! I do like the responses from the rational people who make up most of the people on this site. Unfortunately, there are a group - a known group of cyber bullies - who have upset and lost more valuable and humorous posters on the site over the years, than who have joined.

So who do you think should be reconsidering their responses? Have you ever known me to use personal abuse? Obscene language? Personal attacks on people outside the British eccentricities? Have I joined with other people for cyber bullying? Have I ever insulted people? Have I ever criticised those who post sensibly?
Think about it?

I'm sure Seivad could provide the figures but how many bans have you had?

Have we ever known you to use personal abuse or personal attacks? well you called me an idiot for revealing some personal details in the vain hope of educating you that COVID does exist.

[Toodles McGinty]

What sort of a crank are you? Obviously you must be on the bottle again, you are not sane. Bloody lunatic!

Have you ever known me to use personal abuse? Have I ever insulted people? Have I ever criticised those who post sensibly?
Think about it?

4 posts apart.

[Little Londoner]

It is tiresome and boring and does not appeal to other posters.

That is a good description of 99.999% of your posts.

[Desert Region]

Your son may have a higher education, but you can't benefit from it by osmosis.