Posts by Danielle
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And of course, it would never occur to anyone, least of all Dr Brian "my daughter is female, so there!" Edwards (H/T Boganette, I think) to try to teach 'guys' to treat young women as people worthy of basic respect no matter what they're wearing.
-
? No locking away. The same amount of money distributed over 3-4 children per family up to a certain maximum amount
Again: how, exactly, is that *not* penalising the fifth, sixth, or seventh child in a family dependent on state benefits?
-
Up Front: That's Inappropriate!, in reply to JackElder,
Give your kids French names when you have absolutely no connection with France
... or French-settled territories...?
Sincerely,
Danielle Moreau ;) -
The ‘can’t you find something more important to worry about’ thing is from the Crappy Ways to Argue on the Internet Playbook, I believe, but it might also be from the Stop Caring About These Unimportant Issues, Ladies pamphlet, too. I get so confused.
-
the girl in question is called Amethyst
I am going to rename my son Topaz Zirconia.
(Although, why is 'Amethyst' awful and 'Ruby' acceptable?)
-
Tangential relevance: why is Brian Edwards so bad at arguing on the internet? The 'ask my feminist daughter and granddaughter, although I won't actually be asking them myself!' thing? I couldn't even rustle up enough energy to tell him how idiotic that sounded.
There's an awful lot of 'kids these days are cee-razy, amirite, so you gotta get through to them any way you can!' stuff floating about around this issue, and it makes me tired. 1. They aren't any more crazy than they used to be. 2. As sane people have said, teachers should address behaviour without abusing children with loaded insults. Because teachers are the ADULTS in the situation. Apparently.
-
I think here is where I follow my own suggestion from earlier in the thread and say 'hey, fuck Mr & Mrs Redneck Busybody. They're assholes!'
It would just be allocated differently to remove any incentive to have more children for the sake of increasing the benefit.
OK (I mean, I don't think it's OK, personally, but for the sake of argument), but I don't understand how you see that happening. Where does the money go, and how is it 'locked away' from the parents?
-
The judgeypants! It burns!
-
the name of the peep
A lesser-known Umberto Eco novel, I believe.
-
I think my certainty only lasted about five minutes, if I ever had it. Then things get wondrous again. </sap>