Posts by Deborah
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
(I'll try not to give you all funny voices).
I'll have worry-wort Charlotte from A Room with a View, in her Dame Maggie Smith incarnation.
@Raymond
On matters medical, my two grandsons arrived a month early after a helicopter flight down from Alex last night
Why, congratulations! New born twins - a lovely start to spring. Also, it is sunny here in Adelaide, after weeks of grey sky and mingy rain, so I'm feeling very cheery. And of course cheered by the news from Christchurch.
-
Many thanks for the update, Karl.
-
I'm still concerned about this bit...
all the appropriate bits of her brain are still working
... but I guess that all of us are. The elephant in the room, maybe. I'm scared about it, for Emma and for her beloved partner and children. It's a hell of a thing to be going through, and I still have lots of atheist sceptical vibes making their way across the Tasman to her.
-
Also, che was "first!" (click on the discussion button to see the evidence)
-
If you go back into the dim dark days of November 2006, you will find the launch of PAS.
Announcing: Public Address System
Check the paragraph under this heading: The Public Address Café and Forum
-
All the best for this, Emma. It's a hell of a journey to be taking.
I hope you get to keep Adric in a specimen jar. On top of your mantelpiece. As a talking point.
-
Why not just say pro- or anti-abortion and be rhetorically honest about it?
Mostly because you can be in favour of women being treated as autonomous moral agents and thus pro-choice, but at the same time know that for yourself, you would not choose abortion. But I agree - both labels are tendentious.
But a bit of a derail, neh? Maybe a topic for another day?
-
Here's the difference, Angus.
The first time you say, "You wanna fuck?" that's a question, and it's an okay one to ask between two or more people involved in a conversation. It's even just fine to make it clear that you admire someone's bodily attributes. It might be distasteful - believe me, when you are roaring drunk, you are highly unlikely to be an attractive proposition - but it's not harassment. (Nb: a conversation is not the same as wolf whistling/cat calling/yelling from a car, where the intention is to let the recipient know that the only thing zie is valued for is hir sexual attributes).
If the other person says, "No," then you ought to stop asking. If the other person ignores you, and doesn't answer, you can take that as a no (consent requires the presence of a "yes", not the absence of a "no".) If you ask again, it's harassment.
Geddit?
-
In the real world, however sad it might be, it makes sense not to wear a pork chop around your neck if you wander through places where hyenas lurk.
Please, Jeremy, please, tell me you didn't just compare women to meat? :-)
-
Feck! I get snowed under writing lectures on Hobbes and Lockes and womanfully stay away from the intertubes for two days to get them done in amongst all my usual running around, and log back on to check my regular sites and find all this happening.
I have nothing to add, because the first XV has it well covered, ably assisted by the ballboys, so I have just some comments.
1. Great post.
2. It took until p. 5 before anyone suggested that maybe it was the girleez fault for wearing clubbing clothes.
3. Once I was hit on at church. After I got married, wearing my wedding ring. Wearing church clothes - very respectable.
4. ALAC schmalac.
5. For harassment to occur, the critical ingredient is the presence of a harasser.
6. Rinse and repeat with other crime/criminal pairs eg. theft/thief, rape/rapist.