You've given me cause to think about this Mick but in my attempt to objectively examine my reaction to that 'joke', I am, as yet, still unsure exactly why I am uncomfortable with it. I do tend to go along with the idea that no topic is too sacred to elicit humour but of course if a particular topic is very raw and personal to someone they may not find it amusing. The subject of your joke is not personal to me, though I do have children who are everything to me and I dread to think how I would survive if I was in the same situation as the parent of a child who went missing - so maybe that's where my discomfort originates. I admit that I missed the subtlety behind the posting of your 'joke' but I think the reason given is irrelevant - it seems to me that the posting of it alone is what matters at the end of the day. You are certainly correct in that my sensitivities to crassness have not been blunted but that is not to say that I have not laughed at what could be considered 'sick' jokes and I have certainly laughed, if a little uneasily, at many of Frankie Boyle's offerings. I did think that maybe it was just that it was a bit too soon for the subject to be included in the humour mill but then again I think I would never find it funny. Well now, having said all that, I am not really any further forward in my self-analysis ... maybe time for me to sit on Psycho's couch?
sh, I must confess that I am rather at a loss to understand your interpretation of my viewpoint as expressed in my posts - any of which in reference to you have, to my mind, been supportive of you. I certainly have never meant to offend you at any time and my play on 'pawning' was merely meant to add a little lightheartedness to my post. That is not to say that I always agree with what you say and on occasion your posts have seemed, to me, to be somewhat enigmatic but I certainly support your right to have your say and I have often enjoyed and indeed acknowledged many of your witticisms. I think that describing any of my posts as bordering on 'diatribe' is unfair as I don't believe I have ever been abusive in any of my writings in reference to you. I make no apology for entering into discussion with Mick, Dev, or anyone else, however, as I take the same view that I have expressed in my support of you - ie that it is surely much more preferable to engage in discussion of an opposing point of view than to simply dismiss it, as has happened, on occasion, whereby a number of posters have dismissed you and your posts in a derogatory manner to which I am totally opposed. I can certainly see that the way in which these posters respond to you is not conducive to reasonable discussion and it is quite understandable, therefore, why you would retaliate in kind. My question to you, however, was a genuine attempt to understand your seeming abhorrence of Mick as I do not recall him being one of those who appeared to be totally dismissive of your posts - at least, not in the beginning?
I must ask Superhoops for his boook on how to win friends and influence people! Yet another example of SH taking the wrong end of the stick and having - in this case - an unjust go at another user!
Espania, joins the club. The rest of us have been scratching our heads since he first started posting.
If that is not an admission, of what most normal people would regard as deviant sex activities, especially when Mick has told us what heis doing for Christmas. Personally what I cannot understand is why people who I have to say from time to time claim and often appear to be men of at least average intelligence use this board to describe in detail their sexual deviancy's. Now I couldn't careless what consenting adults do in there spare time but as I think these boards can be and are often read by young teenagers, as there doesn't seem to be any moderator controlling these people I would respectfully advise these people not to post these what most people would regard as private matters. The most amazing feature of these boasts is that they all came out of context.
I have nothing at all against Mick, when he posts normally, however that post that he thought was a joke, to my mind had no place in this forum. His crude statement was purely out of context and if he was a man he would have apologized and we would have moved on. From time to time he decides to have a go at me and I think it is fair game for me to let him have it back. As I say I think Mick is dead on, but needs to be careful of who he attacks and he needs to control his vulgarity.
**** you off grammar Nazi - my brain is broke these days for spelling as I use Google Chrome which has spell check built in - if it doesn't get a red underline I don't notice the mistake. I used 'idealise' instead of 'idolise' in an earlier post too which was quoted before I could fix it and it has being doing my nut in
All friends again. Maltese Mick is no longer going to try to create the Irish clown out of me In return for Mick showing me the respect I deserve , I will show him the same. I don't think we need to be at anyone's throat and contrary to what Espania posts, I did receive a lot of grief from Mick before I threw the emphasis back on Mick.
What an excellent (and funny) answer, thanks. I hardly dare say anything for fear of spoiling the mood. <love-in> I'm delighted that you appear to have perfectly understood the picture I was trying to paint of this site, however. You seem to get the imagery precisely. (We should seriously consider going on a date together. I hear wedding bells.) Well, yes, good point, 4.75 may seem like a bad score for a book (just beneath the pass mark, after all), but when the majority of books Iâve read would only garner points around the 2-3.5 mark (and I automatically award .5 points for the fact that someone has taken the time to write anything at all and A Whole Point for readability â vitally important), then 4.75 may be seen as being a fairly good effort. And Iâve never once read anything that I would give 10/10. Iâd comfortably recommend anything from 4 onwards, on the understanding that such books will almost always fail to entirely deliver and may only infrequently touch upon good ideas. As a means of provoking further thought, however, they might often be seen to have merit. American Pie: Band Camp? That looks atrocious. Based on thisâ¦.. Matt Stifler wants to be just like his big bro, making porn movies and having a good time in college. After sabotaging the school band, he gets sent to band camp where he really doesn't like it at first but then learns how to deal with the bandeez â¦â¦I would instinctively mark this down as a 1.5 and would feel pretty generous in doing so. (I understand from my sources on the street, however, that someone sticks their tumescent man-gadget into an apple pie in this film, for which fact alone I award 1.25 points. The other .25 points are awarded for an imagined perseverance, as all those involved in the production and delivery of such a project quelled those inner voices that must surely have been asking âwhat in the name of Jesus are we doing? We must surely simply stop and do something funny, clever or worthwhile?â Caveat: each to their own. Further caveat: I base these particular remarks on blind prejudice. Fair enough. One of the difficulties, I suppose, is in presenting ourselves with ideas we may not care for in the best possible light. Hmm. That was a clumsy sentence, sorry. Letâs see (an example): I was instinctively in favour of action in Iraq. In order to feel anywhere near comfortable with this, however, I would need to read and listen to opposing arguments just as much as possible, whilst ascribing the best possible motives to those with different ideas and searching out the most impressively articulate arguments against my position. Something like that, anyway â and it suits my temperament perfectly, in any event, as Iâm constitutionally incapable of taking my own arguments (on any given subject) entirely seriously, and will immediately set about trying to annihilate them just as soon as they enter my head. Iâm happy enough with that, although it may occasionally lead to a kind of intellectual stasis whereby the initial (honest) effort to afford opposing ideas equal merit leads to a kind of seemingly irresolvable stand-off - which some might regard as being weakness or as a simple failure to make up oneâs mind. If I choose to be kind to myself, however, Iâll tell you that nothing could be further from the truth and that I have, in fact, made up my mind (for the time being), and Iâve made up my mind that the opposing arguments, when sympathetically appraised, have sufficient merit to all but cancel each other out (and that I was never in a hurry to pick sides anyway). Beware the person who emphatically declares ânothing anyone can say or do will ever change my mind about thisâ. Really? Nothing? Good grief. I struggle to understand why people would say such things with any sort of pride, as if this may be a show of strength. (You see a lot of the 9/11, Jew-hating conspiracy guys on Youtube come out with this stuff, by the way.) Roughly translated, it might simply mean: âI have stopped thinking and refuse to think further on this subject because I have all the answers and know everything.â And thatâs not a good look, to be fair, unless the aim is to celebrate a deeply disturbing intellectual immaturity. But I digress, sorry. Thanks for taking the time, Administrator, and sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Continuing with everything else laterâ¦..
Ah, my understanding of the picture you painted was down to your eloquence, Psycho - your expressive style demands to be noticed and could not fail to draw in anyone with an interest in reading or a craving for more than passable exchange. It is almost hypnotic to the extent that I could not possibly consider a date with such a deft wordsmith ... I wish to remain a perfervid heterosexual Spanish male and I fear for everything I hold dear in that respect should I get too close to you and your silver tongue.
Aye, right. Are you seriously trying to tell me that youâve never left a woman or divorced a wife and set up home with some random man from the internet? Weâre all at it on this site, Espania, you need to get with the script. I left my wife â again â some months ago, for example, and set up home with the boy Trevor Santos from the Rangers board, and you wonât find many on the Celtic forum who are not romantically attached to each other in some way, Iâll tell you that for free. Modern times, modern practices. Itâs no big deal. Thatâs a great word by the way â âperfervidâ. I think you must love the English language to have reached into your head â or a thesaurus, perhaps - to pull that one from the bag. I immediately resolve to try to use it myself some time in the next week. These kind of words deserve an airing. Lovely stuff.
Psycho may be just the man to help you identify the core beliefs that trigger this over-emotional reaction which will enable you to recover the personal power to get control of your adolescent emotions and refrain from such a reactive, obviously jealous, behavioural response.
