I'm disagreeing with a handful of morons on a forum.in serious denial. You, on the other hand, are arguing with: 100's of millions of women, more than fifty years of research into the sexual psychology of humanity, The box offices of cinema's in the US & UK whose records have just been smashed thanks to it's release. Now, who exactly is being a conceited dickhead here? Queenslander. How about the fact the UN brandishes you inherently racist every year. You accused the aborigine's of being all *****'s and used the excuse to suspend your 'race discriminations act' and enact the 'emergency response act' and used it to take the kids and sell the land to mining interests, a recurring theme in your nations history that. This was in 2007, just a few years after your leader did some grandstanding to the world of your 'shame', and then offered the derisory sum of about £2000, enough compensation for decades of the enforced slavery thousands of them endured in the 'aborigine act' apparently. This Nazi like act ran through most of the 20th century until South Africa started getting international condemnation for their toned down version of it (Apartheid) in the 70's. Unlike Australia South Africa had stopped short of salvery. You turned to the aborigine's and said "Here's 2 grand, be grateful your getting it, so take it or leave it, it's less than a compo claim for whiplash but your abo's, so you don't deserve more, and thanks for your work". You could, of course, stopped the aborigine act after the horrors of Nazism were uncovered and the similarities between the treatment of Jews and the treament of Aborigine's were realised. You could have given them their rights when your nearest neighbours NZ gave their aborigines their rights decades earlier, or when America gave everyone theirs, but you waited and waited and waited, still using the slaves, hiring them out at 1/3rd pay and using the money to build hospitals they weren't allowed to use, because you didn't really consider them people, and, truth be told, you still don't. When South Africa started to get real grief for Apartheid you quickly made a big show to the world of stopping the, well documented, slavery, giving them back their kids and land (for the moment) and making a race discrimination act you could pay lip service to for your global image. Was it conscience or fear? South Africa was a much larger country and could survive on it's own, Australia, not so much. I think it's pretty obvious considering everything that's happened since, and is still happening today, that it was definitly a case of the second. There is no greater disparity between two races sharing the same country as between white Australians and aborigine. Tell me, how much of a stink about the emergency response act are white Australians making? Despite overwhelming proof that the '***** rings' that the government and media kept going on about were a complete fabrication, one ***** who was being supplied with viagra by a white doctor who seems to have known what was happening. How much fuss over the stealing of kids and land have you made? any at all? The 'emergency response act', based on a series of lies, is set to run another seven years, unless of course it is extended once again. Another seven years of land and children grabbing, and restricted rights for a race of people already in the worst state of any race on Earth while you ponder 'the aboriginal probelm'.
I wouldn't read too much into that Alf. Queensy has a few shandies of a night and it gets a bit out of control. He don't mean nothing by it.
oh, he didn't personally, it was his white supremacist nation, their media and the government that did it seven years ago in order to steal the land. All verifiable of course, as is everything I've put on this thread.
You still here Miggins? I'd have thought you'd have realised us illiterate, innumerate morons are fairly set in our stupid ways with our stupid opinions and given up by now.
I would've, I shoud've, but when it comes to smacking bigotted people in the face I can't help myself. "We don't like it, so we're going to deny it and shout down anyone who doesn't agree with our narrow-minded views, even if the person mentioning these much researched objects of discussion, in a thread we've put up to scorn players of an opposing teams sexual proclivities, has never said once that he finds it stimulating, indulges in it or said that he thought it was a good thing, the fact he knows and has dared mentioned it is enough. One moment while I retrive my pitchfork from the belly of the man who said the earth was round and went around the sun". I also notice now that some of you are aiming thinly veiled homphobic slurs at the one person who dared to write what he found under 'female rape fantasy'. How enlightened you all are, such wonderful examples of humanity. haha, hoisted on the petard of assumption, like most on here have been, I assumed from his name 'Queenslander' he came from Oz. My apologies to him
Interesting you should say that. Once it was a universally known truth (to quote your own words) that the Sun revolved around the Earth. Perhaps we, despite our ignorance and mass stupidity, are the ones looking for answers outside conventional wisdom of 50 years of research (I still haven't looked TBH but haven't ever denied that bit). All hail the Not606 pioneers of modern thinking.
Yes fortunately science won that time too and people like you were ignored. What's funny is the one woman who claims to have read it, and launched into various diatribes agaist me, has not once complained about the books quite obvious abused woman theme, NOT. ****ING. ONCE!! In the book there is not one suggestion that she enjoys any of the beatings, in fact it's the opposite, as those links to p[assages of the book show. All the way through this book of womens sexual desires the thought that she is going to get beaten and punished fills her with dread and depression. Yet your reader doesn't seem to have a problem with the abuse, she just has a problem with me highlighting that a book she described as 'interesting' isa book about female sexuality and desires is about abuse and what she thinks her liking it will probaly say about her. After all, despite it being appallingly written and a subject she obviously has such strong feelings against, she seems to have read it all. sorry about that, thought it was another white Aussie denying how disgracefully racist the majority of his nation are, despite the blatantly clear evidence they walk passed every day and the yearly slamming they get from the UN for it.
Miggings. I'm disagreeing with YOUR interpretation of the data and your misunderstanding of the concept of domination. Which you seem to consider rape. Domination and rape are very diffetent things. I supect you know this but your need to play devils advocate just makes you look a right muppet. As for the psychobabble you say I am flying in the face of, psychology is opinion. No psychologist can actually prove their theorys and as such the whole field is conjecture. In the end experience outweighs theory and what actual experience do you have of masochism, apart from keep coming back here to be ridiculed again by a bunch of morons (your words) that disagree with you. Well if you can't handle having people disagreeing with you, a public forum may not be the best place to air your tripe.
FIFTY SHADES OF GREY - (a husband's point of view) The missus bought a Paperback, down Shepton Mallet way, I had a look inside her bag; ... T'was "Fifty Shades of Grey". Well I just left her to it, And at ten I went to bed. An hour later she appeared; The sight filled me with dread... In her left she held a rope; And in her right a whip! She threw them down upon the floor, And then began to strip. Well fifty years or so ago; I might have had a peek; But Mabel hasn't weathered well; She's eighty four next week!! Watching Mabel bump and grind; Could not have been much grimmer. And things then went from bad to worse; She toppled off her Zimmer! She struggled back upon her feet; A couple minutes later; She put her teeth back in and said I am a dominater !! Now if you knew our Mabel, You'd see just why I spluttered, I'd spent two months in traction For the last complaint I'd uttered. She stood there nude and naked Bent forward just a bit I went to hold her, sensual like and stood on her left tit! Mabel screamed, her teeth shot out; My God what had I done!? She moaned and groaned then shouted out: "Step on the other one"!! Well readers, I can tell no more; Of what occurred that day. Suffice to say my jet black hair, Turned fifty shades of grey.
Genius Kiwi. Pure Genius. The most entertaining contribution to the thread by far. Hat's off to you old bean. (Trying hard to get the image of Mabel's old bean out my head though.)
The only face your smacking is your own. There is not one person agreeing with you, yet your like a dog with a bone. If one person disagrees with you, then it's a disagreement, but when your completely alienated in your view, it might be worth considering your view might be somewhat skewed. But your arrogance is preventing you from doing that. And your calling us the morons and bigots. Oh the irony.
So why then, if MY ideas of the differnce between rape and domination are so wrong why are so many people into BDSM (bondage, dominatin, sadism and masochism) so up in arms about the depiction in the book? Why is the BDSM community, people whose lives revolve around the lifestyle and who actually have lots of experience so up in arms about the rape and abuse in it claiming it has nothing to do with BDSM and all to do with rape and abuse'? HMM? are these people that actually live that lifestyle all wrong because a narrow minded football fan says so. Are you seriously telling me that the people who atually live a lifestyle you have no experience of are wrong because YOU say so? And you have the temerity to call me arrogant and conceited,. get your thick-skulled narrow-minded biggotted head out of your arse, Do you know what bondage and domination is about, because from where I'm sitting it's pretty obvious you do not have the first ****ing clue. BDSM is consensual, in other words BOTH PARTIES LIKE, ENJOY AND ACCEPT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. At no point in fsog does she enjoy any of the beatings, in fact it's made quite clear that she's just too scared to say no, in case of what happens afterwards.There are no one-sided contracts where the submissive has no say and is told 'you better get used to it then', as that is abuse. If you seriously think the submissives in BDSM don't like being beaten and find what happens to them 'depressing' and have a fear and loathing of the beatings they are going to receive for daring to talk to their friends and family, which also happens A LOT in fsog then you couldn't be more wrong, people like that are most certainly NOT into BDSM. You are so far off base of what BDSM is it ain't even funny, if you had bothered to read the passages you would see that quite clearly. It's a book about abuse rather than BDSM. Oh and just because you've found a few sychophants to agree with you doesn't make you right, moron, it just means there are other people as stupid and ignorant as you are. You havn't bothered to check what I've said at all, (though I suspect you have and are just in denial) you just gather together a mob of cronies, all assuming that how you feel about something is all the proof you need. Unlike this person, who actually bothered to check his facts before making himself look as stupid as you. And then you can you explain to me how x-1 = 100% (this is fairly basic algaebra, so don't get confused, x can be any positive number you like, it'll stil work out). Or is it a case of anyone who dares look it up and print what they have found is instantly removed from the equation?
[QUOTE=" get your thick-skulled narrow-minded biggotted head out of your arse?[/QUOTE] And this is what you can come up with. Done with you. Your spouting **** and it's blocking your ears. Got better things to do with my life. As for calling posters on here sycophants, well I'll let them speak for themselves on that.
Miggins slated me for this post:- He considers Swords to be the most open minded person based on this though:- Pretty similar unless his soul objective is for people to validate his ability to use Google and repeat items without interpretation. Me and Swords were pretty similar in our interpretation. Miggins has still offered no interpretation that I can see.
Well he obviously doesn't know what the word bigot even means as he's used it out of context quite often on this thread. I'm writing him off as a trolling numpty and not wasting my head on the guy anymore.
I think your 'education' was a massive waste of taxpayers money.here's the meaning of bigot (you could've looked this up too, and not made yourslf look stupid, again.) Bigotry is a state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly or intolerantly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.[1][2] Some examples include personal beliefs, race, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation , socioeconomic status, or other group characteristics. So abhorrant do you find the mere possibility that some members of the female sex might enjoy something you find distasteful you have done nothing but insult the person who relayed the easily researched information and call it a lie, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You have nothing to back up what you say at all, you even admit openly that you havn't bothered to do one bit of research to back up your beliefs (though I think you have, found something you didn't like and, like all bigotted people, denied the truth). You simply expect everyone to agree with your beliefs, even if they can be proven wrong. Which they have been conclusively. As you can see, that makes you quite clearly a bigot.
And by your own definition ..."Bigotry is a state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly or intolerantly dislikes other people, ideas,"........... so are you
