Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[AndrewV69]

Andrew can you tell how many grams of gold does your precious dick weight? Or maybe it is covered with milk and honey, cause damn there's no other reason the ladies are trying to get you into that trap that's marriage.
So much butthurt over a fucking contract...

This made me LOL, and I like Andrew (most of the time).

Why thank you.

/bow

[AndrewV69]

Fuck You. You underestimate the power self delusion. That is your problem right there in a nutshell.

Not yours, sparkle pony.

Of course not. I am firm and resolute. You are just stubborn and pigheaded.

[Parody Accountant]

<snip>
Rome wasn’t built in a day. And one swallow doesn’t make a spring. But if you go around shooting the swallows that do show up, or moving corner stones that have been laid down already, it is only going to delay the process.

Are you suggesting that EBW's conversion came about because of a minor concession of some kind from the enemy? I rather think it was because of the treatment she herself received and I somehow doubt that differing perceptions of a portion of a speech would have been on the radar.

No, not entirely.

While DongleGate was, no doubt, a major factor in that “conversion”, that epiphany, my impression is that a great many positive actions on the part of many here contributed to it. But that in turn is, no doubt, likely to be a contributing factor in changing outside opinions of the Pit, of “our” side in general. For instance, I note that EllenBeth has recently reblogged a post of Welch’s – do you think that – and EllenBeth’s previous conclusion – would have taken place if he, and many others here, hadn’t been promoting reasonable and evidence-based criticisms (generally) of FTB and company, hadn’t been out there “witnessing to the heathens”?

But none of those criticisms are going to fly if it looks like “we” have our own biases, prejudices and hypocrises.

well of course we do. The point isn't that we're perfect. The point is we aren't denying our mistakes.

http://us.cdn3.123rf.com/168nwm/evgenij ... on-a-w.jpg

The point is our mistakes are plain to see, even if some of us deny them.

We aren't histrionic, though some are stubborn.

[ERV]

I still come across people who get prescribed that stuff like candy. One was a 25 year old fitness instructor at the gym I go to. She started having panic attacks and I explained to her that if there was ever anyone who died from a panic attack, it wasn't a 25 year-old fitness instructor. Yet her doctor, who probably got a days training in addiction, prescribed both Klonopin and Xanax for her. I talked her through things to do because, like a newb, she didn't realize the only way out from a panic attack is through the other side. I basically shared all my experience and it did help her. She started telling me every time she had one and we'd basically debrief.

The best news was she hasn't taken any of that stuff for weeks, although she was doing a Xanax a day, and then taking it anticipatory, which is the road to hell. She was also starting to avoid situations where she might have one, which just makes it free-float and more situations get added to the list of things that "cause" a panic attack. They don't as a panic attack is just a triggering of the flight or fight response, and associating it with any situation is usually conditioned and often ad hoc.

I have to check to see if she followed up with cognitive and behavior therapy. That's the real answer, or at least the answer that lets everyone find their own answer, as it's different for each person.

Benzos isn't even close to an answer.

CBT works for a lot of shit. Im sure I mentioned here that Xanax did somewhere between 'jack' and 'shit' for me (well, they did help if I took them with 1/2 bottle of wine, but Im pretty sure that was the wine 'helping').

If your friend wants a chick to talk with whos been through that crap, pass along my email.

(btw, another reason I dislike JT is for his talks pushing drugs for mental disorders. the drugs are of questionable efficacy, CBT works.)

[AndrewV69]

Ok, ok, I guess a whole bunch of people around here have forgotten about the causes behind the strict child support laws. Once upon a time, deadbeat motherfuckers decided that abandoning their wives with a couple children behind to get some fresh pussy had no consequences. That shit created a whole bunch of social problems and the situation was overcorrected by passing some tough ass laws.

I doubt that the people telling those stories were aware of that at all. All they know is their own situation. Remember that many of these guys are not exactly up to date on history of any sort.

If I ever find the link again I will post a paper written in the 16th century documenting the issues leading to children born out of wedlock in rural England. The reason for concern was the burden that these children represented on the various parish councils (unclear exactly what were) who were othewise absent a provider. It also noted the rural attitutes towards drinking and sex.

On rather humorous example given (to my mind anyway) was a group of young women who regularly provided the material necessary to a brewer and who subsequently organized a drinking party to enjoy the results. On one occasion apparently one of the young woman after getting lubricated topped off the evening by indulging in fornication in the stables with some fellow, with predicable results the requisite months later.

Bottom line: you don't want to pay child support? Don't get anybody pregnant. You don't get anyone pregnant by cutting those tubes inside your balls. So, grow a pair. Get fixed. Stop complaining about mandates from the court to support the children that are 50% yours.

the end.

PS. Feminists pissed the fuck out of me, but MRAs seem to have more sand on their vaginas.

You see that? Observe the violence inherent in the feminist governance of gynocratic feminazi wot control the vagina supply! Observe how they lead us around by our penis! See how they oppress us and blame us who they victimize!

[Mykeru]

I still come across people who get prescribed that stuff like candy. One was a 25 year old fitness instructor at the gym I go to. She started having panic attacks and I explained to her that if there was ever anyone who died from a panic attack, it wasn't a 25 year-old fitness instructor. Yet her doctor, who probably got a days training in addiction, prescribed both Klonopin and Xanax for her. I talked her through things to do because, like a newb, she didn't realize the only way out from a panic attack is through the other side. I basically shared all my experience and it did help her. She started telling me every time she had one and we'd basically debrief.

The best news was she hasn't taken any of that stuff for weeks, although she was doing a Xanax a day, and then taking it anticipatory, which is the road to hell. She was also starting to avoid situations where she might have one, which just makes it free-float and more situations get added to the list of things that "cause" a panic attack. They don't as a panic attack is just a triggering of the flight or fight response, and associating it with any situation is usually conditioned and often ad hoc.

I have to check to see if she followed up with cognitive and behavior therapy. That's the real answer, or at least the answer that lets everyone find their own answer, as it's different for each person.

Benzos isn't even close to an answer.

CBT works for a lot of shit. Im sure I mentioned here that Xanax did somewhere between 'jack' and 'shit' for me (well, they did help if I took them with 1/2 bottle of wine, but Im pretty sure that was the wine 'helping').

If your friend wants a chick to talk with whos been through that crap, pass along my email.

(btw, another reason I dislike JT is for his talks pushing drugs for mental disorders. the drugs are of questionable efficacy, CBT works.)

I already looked up some stuff for her on Angels for Anxiety including women's groups in the area. I have to see if she followed through. Of course, with our experience with some *eh-hem* women's groups, I told her to watch out for people who tell war stories and try to one-up each other with how bad they've got it.

I will pass on your email, because options are always good.

OH, and cock and ball torture? How does that help? OH, CBT..cognitive...nevermind.

[BaconNutellaFiend]

OH, and cock and ball torture? How does that help? OH, CBT..cognitive...nevermind.

Thanks for clearing that up!

[Mykeru]

You see that? Observe the violence inherent in the feminist governance of gynocratic feminazi wot control the vagina supply! Observe how they lead us around by our penis! See how they oppress us and blame us who they victimize!

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lyl9w ... o1_500.gif

[AndrewV69]

<snip>
yes, yes, and the husband was a perfect angel who had nary a cross word for even the mosquito biting him.

I have yet to see ANY divorce where both sides weren't the asshole.

Tends to bring out the best in both, doesn't it?
Certainly a great many cases where one is worse or more at fault than the other, but I rather doubt that, statistically speaking, there's all that much difference in the actual numbers by sex ....

Oh just do what I did. Go live in another country. Failing that put around 2,000 kilometres between you and her if the country is big enough.

Problem?

[Steersman]

<snip>
Generally agree with you. However, to really make the cheese more binding, so to speak, to make the implied charge of hypocrisy more credible, I think you have to show a case where he explicitly criticizes someone on the pit for making the exact same sort of joke.
...

As i've said before. When PeeZus et al decide to live up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them, *to the same level they demand of others*, then and only then will i give a flying fuck about nuance as it applies to them. Until then, they can all line up and hob my knob if they think i'm going to be the least bit charitable towards them.

And, pray tell, where is he actually not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? Even assuming, for the sake of argument, a position that I don’t at all accept – that that joke was sexist and caused grievous amounts of “splash damage”, if not onerous amounts of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth – how is it that a past “transgression” against today’s “law” that wasn’t “on the books” at that time constitutes that not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? You think that people shouldn’t be allowed to change their minds, to maybe come up with “better” standards of behaviour than the ones they held in the past? You think that a new law against parking in certain areas should justify going back and fining those who were parked “illegally” in the past?

But you yourself have held the same standards of behaviour throughout your entire life? You have never “transgressed” in the past against a standard you now subscribe to? Unless you can answer “yes” to both questions I would say that that is a case of being not particularly charitable. Or intellectually honest.

But maybe my use of “charitable” caused a bit of a derail, maybe because of some questionable connotations. Maybe it looks like charity to judge them – those “others” – by the same standards you would judge yourself. But I figure it is more a question of intellectual honesty; not something one does for others, but something one does more for oneself. Out of necessity for simple survival; “To thine ownself be true” and all that.

[bovarchist]

I wont be happy until EVERYONE has the right to be this bitchy:

Kathy Mason and her boyfriend gifted a food basket to Laura (who declined to give her last name) and her bride.

"I'm not sure if it's the first wedding you have been to, but for your next wedding … people give envelopes. I lost out on $200 covering you and your dates plate . … and got fluffy whip and sour patch kids in return. Just a heads-up for the future."

Ah, see? What a celebration of LOVE! :P

What are the odds that a lesbian with a gluten allergy would also be a bitch? :hand: I love the etiquette expert they consulted:

Gift-givers: "… to ask for a receipt is unfathomable. In fact it was incredibly disrespectful. It was the rudest gesture I have encountered, or even heard of."

You've obviously never read Game of Thrones.

[AndrewV69]

Ohhh Cougar spotted!!!!!

(grabs camera .. if I never show up here again you can guess what happened)

[Lsuoma]

Ohhh Cougar spotted!!!!!

(grabs camera .. if I never show up here again you can guess what happened)

You fucked the slutty fifty-year-old-in-toreador-pants-and-leopard-print-top's brains out, the took a creampie picture, and she kicked your bollocks through your pleural cavity?

[AndrewV69]

Ohhh Cougar spotted!!!!!

(grabs camera .. if I never show up here again you can guess what happened)

You fucked the slutty fifty-year-old-in-toreador-pants-and-leopard-print-top's brains out, the took a creampie picture, and she kicked your bollocks through your pleural cavity?

Haha! No this was the real deal. Neighbour notified me he was real close, couple of hundred feet away, but by the time I got there it was gone. I was told this is a big one, around 10 feet so it was probably a male.

I am so disappoint my jimmies are rustled.

[TheMan]

Ohhh Cougar spotted!!!!!

(grabs camera .. if I never show up here again you can guess what happened)

You fox you :mrgreen:

[Walter Ego]

Justin is getting addicted to the teat, and his using a completely vague assertion like "many people told me they want me to go to TAM" as an excuse for him to stick his hand out yet again and expect others to fill it up with cash is galling and repugnant to me. What exactly is to be gained by sending a charity case like Justin to con after con? All it does is let Justin pad his atheoskeptic CV on other peoples' dime. Fuck that.

Now Mykeru going, on the other hand, is a great idea. Any dolt can live tweet from a con. Mykeru would actually do something useful and entertaining.

I got to know Justin personally in some Skype chats last year and I respect him as an activist and a person. I would choose him as my representative at TAM over some anonymous cow skull man any day of the week.

[AndrewV69]

Seeing as divorce was a recent topic:
[youtube]pjz12QXnHBk#at=65[/youtube]

[Parody Accountant]

I got to know Justin personally in some Skype chats last year and I respect him as an activist and a person. I would choose him as my representative at TAM over some anonymous cow skull man any day of the week.

You're doing it again.

[youtube]v3oB4_p41sE[/youtube]

[Aneris]

Didn't do much reading, but wanted to drop another (obvious?) observation. Flame Baiting and Victim Blaming are a perfect strategy. I believe this is Rebecca Watson's secret sauce.

How to do it: place flame bait, someone eats it and "attacks", claim that there was nothing wrong and blame the "attacker", attacker tries to defend → gotcha, victim blamer. The most virtuous way is to flame bait with the icky misogynist topic, as it directly connects to the victim blaming end game. For those who don't see what's flame baiting with her messages, go read what she writes and make sure you really think about it (hint: australian military begining of text, setting the stage, ending with Lindsay and Co.).

[AndrewV69]

Seeing as divorce was a recent topic:
[youtube]pjz12QXnHBk#at=65[/youtube]

Oh Bugger! Preview fail. Retry:
[youtube]pjz12QXnHBk[/youtube]

[Hunt]

Benzos isn't even close to an answer.

I agree and don't agree at the same time. I don't think there's any question that there are a lot of people who have been totally fucked up by benzos, on the other hand, as a class of drugs, they've gotten a very bad rap based on that segment of people who have either deliberately or accidentally abused them. The best book I've ever read covering this is this one, which at this time is becoming a bit dated, but still valid IMO:



Salient features that I recall from reading it:

Most therapists realize that there are some people who do very well on long-term, monitored benzo use, and very badly off them. The idea that a person will begin to tolerate and then escalate benzo dose is largely a myth. While people do tend to tolerate the tranquilizing effects of benzo, then don't usually tolerate the anxiolytic effects they have, therefore there is no need to escalate dose to control anxiety.

Also, there's a very important distinction between addiction and physical dependence. They aren't the same, though most practitioners, even psychiatrists, never make the distinction.

However, due to the stigma that they're addictive drugs, physicians will sometimes label chronic users as addicts, often with disastrous consequence. One anecdote the author gives (this from my memory of reading it several years ago) is seeing a woman who went to a clinic for some odd ailment who happened to be on a low maintenance dose of benzodiazepine for general anxiety or agoraphobia. The attending physician immediately diagnosed drug addiction and sent her to a recovery program, halting her medication. The woman grew progressively worse, eventually lost her job and at the time he saw her was about to lose her housing. He reinstated her medication and she gradually began to recover. All of this was caused by stigma and misunderstanding of the utility of benzodiazepines.

In general, and as with many other things, I think this is a case of a few people ruining it for the majority of others. Although the stigma of benzos as addictive doesn't seem to have hampered their use. AFAIK, they're still one of the most prescribed class of drugs there is.

[welch]

I still come across people who get prescribed that stuff like candy. One was a 25 year old fitness instructor at the gym I go to. She started having panic attacks and I explained to her that if there was ever anyone who died from a panic attack, it wasn't a 25 year-old fitness instructor. Yet her doctor, who probably got a days training in addiction, prescribed both Klonopin and Xanax for her. I talked her through things to do because, like a newb, she didn't realize the only way out from a panic attack is through the other side. I basically shared all my experience and it did help her. She started telling me every time she had one and we'd basically debrief.

The best news was she hasn't taken any of that stuff for weeks, although she was doing a Xanax a day, and then taking it anticipatory, which is the road to hell. She was also starting to avoid situations where she might have one, which just makes it free-float and more situations get added to the list of things that "cause" a panic attack. They don't as a panic attack is just a triggering of the flight or fight response, and associating it with any situation is usually conditioned and often ad hoc.

I have to check to see if she followed up with cognitive and behavior therapy. That's the real answer, or at least the answer that lets everyone find their own answer, as it's different for each person.

Benzos isn't even close to an answer.

CBT works for a lot of shit. Im sure I mentioned here that Xanax did somewhere between 'jack' and 'shit' for me (well, they did help if I took them with 1/2 bottle of wine, but Im pretty sure that was the wine 'helping').

If your friend wants a chick to talk with whos been through that crap, pass along my email.

(btw, another reason I dislike JT is for his talks pushing drugs for mental disorders. the drugs are of questionable efficacy, CBT works.)

But therapy is harrrrrrd and they expect you to chaaaaannnnnge things and they don't tell you everything you do is wonnnnnderfullllll

[welch]

<snip>
Generally agree with you. However, to really make the cheese more binding, so to speak, to make the implied charge of hypocrisy more credible, I think you have to show a case where he explicitly criticizes someone on the pit for making the exact same sort of joke.
...

As i've said before. When PeeZus et al decide to live up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them, *to the same level they demand of others*, then and only then will i give a flying fuck about nuance as it applies to them. Until then, they can all line up and hob my knob if they think i'm going to be the least bit charitable towards them.

And, pray tell, where is he actually not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? Even assuming, for the sake of argument, a position that I don’t at all accept – that that joke was sexist and caused grievous amounts of “splash damage”, if not onerous amounts of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth – how is it that a past “transgression” against today’s “law” that wasn’t “on the books” at that time constitutes that not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? You think that people shouldn’t be allowed to change their minds, to maybe come up with “better” standards of behaviour than the ones they held in the past? You think that a new law against parking in certain areas should justify going back and fining those who were parked “illegally” in the past?

But you yourself have held the same standards of behaviour throughout your entire life? You have never “transgressed” in the past against a standard you now subscribe to? Unless you can answer “yes” to both questions I would say that that is a case of being not particularly charitable. Or intellectually honest.

But maybe my use of “charitable” caused a bit of a derail, maybe because of some questionable connotations. Maybe it looks like charity to judge them – those “others” – by the same standards you would judge yourself. But I figure it is more a question of intellectual honesty; not something one does for others, but something one does more for oneself. Out of necessity for simple survival; “To thine ownself be true” and all that.

No steerzo, I'm not, nor have I ever claimed to be perfect. But if I'm going to insist that someone else live up to a standard, you can bet your ass i'll crawl through glass to live up to that same standard *better*. It's why I leave work after the people who work for me, and if I ask someone to be in on a weekend, i'm there too. It's why if I'm going to bitch at my kid about cleaning, he sees me cleaning WITHOUT being bitched at. So on and so forth.

It's not about perfection, it's about at least fucking trying, and the FTB/Skepchicks lot don't even fucking TRY to abide by the same standards they demand of everyone else. "CUNT IS ALWAYS BAD...unless we say it, then it's *ironic*". Fuck that shit. I've no problem with someone disliking a word, but then I better not hear them justifying their use of it. If you slip up, apologize and try to do better.

It's the continual justification the FTB lot comes up with for their failure to live up to their own standards that piss me off.

as far as having held the same standards of behavior throughout my life? Pretty much yeah, but my standards are few in number, and realistic in nature. I don't demand some fucked up thing that no one can seriously meet. Do a good job because that's what you're supposed to do. If you work for or with someone, then do so to the best of your ability. Help people get their lives in order the way THEY think best. When you fuck up, apologize and learn from it, so you don't keep doing it over and over. Etc.

[welch]

I wont be happy until EVERYONE has the right to be this bitchy:

Kathy Mason and her boyfriend gifted a food basket to Laura (who declined to give her last name) and her bride.

"I'm not sure if it's the first wedding you have been to, but for your next wedding … people give envelopes. I lost out on $200 covering you and your dates plate . … and got fluffy whip and sour patch kids in return. Just a heads-up for the future."

Ah, see? What a celebration of LOVE! :P

What are the odds that a lesbian with a gluten allergy would also be a bitch? :hand: I love the etiquette expert they consulted:

Gift-givers: "… to ask for a receipt is unfathomable. In fact it was incredibly disrespectful. It was the rudest gesture I have encountered, or even heard of."

You've obviously never read Game of Thrones.

My take on this kind of entitlement bullshit:

http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2007/12/ ... elfce.html

[aweraw]

P. S.

the usual suspects like Mykeru

Go fuck yourself.

[youtube]syZakXYypRs[/youtube]

[aweraw]

Hail Chieftain Vacula!!(?)

"I didn't vote for 'im"

[youtube]qk12ALX9fz8[/youtube]

[welch]

Justin is getting addicted to the teat, and his using a completely vague assertion like "many people told me they want me to go to TAM" as an excuse for him to stick his hand out yet again and expect others to fill it up with cash is galling and repugnant to me. What exactly is to be gained by sending a charity case like Justin to con after con? All it does is let Justin pad his atheoskeptic CV on other peoples' dime. Fuck that.

Now Mykeru going, on the other hand, is a great idea. Any dolt can live tweet from a con. Mykeru would actually do something useful and entertaining.

I got to know Justin personally in some Skype chats last year and I respect him as an activist and a person. I would choose him as my representative at TAM over some anonymous cow skull man any day of the week.

then feel free to donate. But first, learn how to quote. None of that was me.

[Aneris]

It goes without saying that this is disgusting. What is interesting about it, how they report about it.

You might not have heard about the security guard that groped a journalist at this year's E3. Or the writer who gave a PR woman his business card by slipping it in her dress. Or the women presumed to be booth babes simply because of the way they looked.

E3 is the busiest time to be working in the games industry or as a reporter covering the scene. It's the biggest, most important event of the year. But with roughly 50,000 attendees, it's also sometimes the creepiest. Continue...The Creepy Side of E3

Again, the idea that anyone needs evidence for "being against" something is misguided, e.g. you don't need to have slavery to be against it, or fascistic regimes etc. However, its very good that they come forward and speak up about it. I find notable here how the whole instrumentalisation as we know it from drama bloggers is absent.

[Trophy]

Ok, ok, I guess a whole bunch of people around here have forgotten about the causes behind the strict child support laws. Once upon a time, deadbeat motherfuckers decided that abandoning their wives with a couple children behind to get some fresh pussy had no consequences. That shit created a whole bunch of social problems and the situation was overcorrected by passing some tough ass laws.
Bottom line: you don't want to pay child support? Don't get anybody pregnant. You don't get anyone pregnant by cutting those tubes inside your balls. So, grow a pair. Get fixed. Stop complaining about mandates from the court to support the children that are 50% yours.

the end.


PS. Feminists pissed the fuck out of me, but MRAs seem to have more sand on their vaginas.

I endorse this message.

And regarding "psycho women", don't trust your male buddies who are going through a divorce to be rational and unbiased and to give you an objective assessment of the mental status of their partners. In fact, don't trust anyone who's going through a divorce about the other person, *unless* you have seen the fucking evidence yourself.

[AndrewV69]

Didn't do much reading, but wanted to drop another (obvious?) observation. Flame Baiting and Victim Blaming are a perfect strategy. I believe this is Rebecca Watson's secret sauce.

How to do it: place flame bait, someone eats it and "attacks", claim that there was nothing wrong and blame the "attacker", attacker tries to defend → gotcha, victim blamer. The most virtuous way is to flame bait with the icky misogynist topic, as it directly connects to the victim blaming end game. For those who don't see what's flame baiting with her messages, go read what she writes and make sure you really think about it (hint: australian military begining of text, setting the stage, ending with Lindsay and Co.).

This was my favourite part. I got all misty eyed and started gazing upward at the thought of how you too can be brave, courageous, standing firm, the true North, Strong and Free, Home of the Brave, America, America, we stand on guard for thee! Long live the Queen! Long may she reign! Britons shall never never ever be Slaves!!!

Fuck me if I did not have goose bumps the size of duck eggs after reading this:

To hold these leaders accountable, though, sometimes takes courage. If we want a better movement, some of us are going to have to give up certain things: our idolization of prominent men, our quiet anonymity, and our job security, for a start. I’ve already given all that up, and so have some others, but we’re not going to get anywhere until more people join in. I hope they do, eventually.

[Trophy]

1. I find the idea that men get someone pregnant in this "my body, my choice" age, handing men all the responsibility and none of the power, to be a vast gender-sociological dick move.

What the hell does this even mean?

[aweraw]

1. I find the idea that men get someone pregnant in this "my body, my choice" age, handing men all the responsibility and none of the power, to be a vast gender-sociological dick move.

What the hell does this even mean?

Feels weird to point this out, and I expect you already know, but he's relating it to the abortion argument. Women having full control over the life of the feotus, even though they did not create it on their own; then if the feotus is not terminated, saddling the father with financial responsibility.

I see what he's saying, there's a definite imbalance of power in that specific situation. I just have no idea how you'd approach that problem without impinging on the womans bodily autonomy.

[Voryn]

I wont be happy until EVERYONE has the right to be this bitchy:

Kathy Mason and her boyfriend gifted a food basket to Laura (who declined to give her last name) and her bride.

"I'm not sure if it's the first wedding you have been to, but for your next wedding … people give envelopes. I lost out on $200 covering you and your dates plate . … and got fluffy whip and sour patch kids in return. Just a heads-up for the future."

Ah, see? What a celebration of LOVE! :P

What are the odds that a lesbian with a gluten allergy would also be a bitch? :hand: I love the etiquette expert they consulted:

Gift-givers: "… to ask for a receipt is unfathomable. In fact it was incredibly disrespectful. It was the rudest gesture I have encountered, or even heard of."

You've obviously never read Game of Thrones.

My take on this kind of entitlement bullshit:

http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2007/12/ ... elfce.html

Gift cards are, ahem, da bomb!

That woman seemed to be in a magic place where everything is running smoothly and all necessities just fall in her lap, so collecting family heirlooms is all she has left. On the first christmas I spent with my boyfriend's family I received a $50 gift card to the local mall, I put that towards nice clothes to use for job interviews (still need the job now, but it was great prep-help.) It's disgusting that this woman would get so excited for chocolate covered strawberries (from the person who was in the hospital of all things!) but be pissed if someone gave her a giftcard to get said strawberries when she's ready to eat them.

That said.. I'm craving some chocolate covered strawberries now :whistle:

[Steersman]

<snip>
And, pray tell, where is he actually not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? Even assuming, for the sake of argument, a position that I don’t at all accept – that that joke was sexist and caused grievous amounts of “splash damage”, if not onerous amounts of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth – how is it that a past “transgression” against today’s “law” that wasn’t “on the books” at that time constitutes that not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? You think that people shouldn’t be allowed to change their minds, to maybe come up with “better” standards of behaviour than the ones they held in the past? You think that a new law against parking in certain areas should justify going back and fining those who were parked “illegally” in the past? ....

No steerzo, I'm not, nor have I ever claimed to be perfect. …. It's not about perfection, it's about at least fucking trying, and the FTB/Skepchicks lot don't even fucking TRY to abide by the same standards they demand of everyone else. "CUNT IS ALWAYS BAD...unless we say it, then it's *ironic*". Fuck that shit.

Well – welchy – you didn’t really address the question of PZ’s “slut” joke of several years ago. Nor the somewhat analogous question of fining people for “illegally” parking in an area yesterday even though the law making it illegal wasn’t passed until today. Both of which were or are the starting point for this particular issue. And of more than passing relevance to wider issues.

[aweraw]

I spell fetus funny like

[Matt Cavanaugh]

I think (based on my experience anyway) that marriage is overrated with lots of potential downside

'What's the value-add?' I always ask. "We want to memorialize our love', is the usual answer. Then get a frakking tatoo, I say -- they last longer, and are harder to undo.

[Trophy]

1. I find the idea that men get someone pregnant in this "my body, my choice" age, handing men all the responsibility and none of the power, to be a vast gender-sociological dick move.

What the hell does this even mean?

Feels weird to point this out, and I expect you already know, but he's relating it to the abortion argument. Women having full control over the life of the feotus, even though they did not create it on their own; then if the feotus is not terminated, saddling the father with financial responsibility.

I see what he's saying, there's a definite imbalance of power in that specific situation. I just have no idea how you'd approach that problem without impinging on the womans bodily autonomy.

Well that's because you can't. At least not as long as we are stuck with this biology. And as codelette wrote, if you don't want to risk having to take the responsibility of raising a child, close down the pipes. Problem solved.

Seriously, this is not too difficult to understand:
1) Women have autonomy of their bodies -> they get to choose to terminate a pregnancy or to carry it to the term.
2) Once the baby is delivered, custody and the child support is no longer a gendered issue. It's the kid's fucking right!

So yeah, it sucks to be a guy who didn't want any kids but his partner/fuck buddy decided to keep the baby. Yeah it sucks. But it would suck more for the kid if it grows up with no financial support. So, as a guy, you should suck up and pay up.

Or if you don't want to have babies close down the pipes. Seriously.

Having sex is not just fun. It can have serious consequences. And that's one reason AVfM articles can piss me off. These privileged assholes think it's their fucking right to get laid and have tons of sex, most preferably with hot chicks and they do not consider the fact that even well within the 20th century, having sex was a very serious business with very serious consequences. Sex could kill you through jealousy, archaic laws and morality, fight over mates, and sexually transmitted diseases. Nowadays, we are free from many of the consequences of having sex and this apparently has spoiled many people and turned them into pathetic whiners.

[aweraw]

Well that's because you can't. At least not as long as we are stuck with this biology. And as codelette wrote, if you don't want to risk having to take the responsibility of raising a child, close down the pipes. Problem solved.

Seriously, this is not too difficult to understand:
1) Women have autonomy of their bodies -> they get to choose to terminate a pregnancy or to carry it to the term.
2) Once the baby is delivered, custody and the child support is no longer a gendered issue. It's the kid's fucking right!

So yeah, it sucks to be a guy who didn't want any kids but his partner/fuck buddy decided to keep the baby. Yeah it sucks. But it would suck more for the kid if it grows up with no financial support. So, as a guy, you should suck up and pay up.

Or if you don't want to have babies close down the pipes. Seriously.

Having sex is not just fun. It can have serious consequences. And that's one reason AVfM articles can piss me off. These privileged assholes think it's their fucking right to get laid and have tons of sex, most preferably with hot chicks and they do not consider the fact that even well within the 20th century, having sex was a very serious business with very serious consequences. Sex could kill you through jealousy, archaic laws and morality, fight over mates, and sexually transmitted diseases. Nowadays, we are free from many of the consequences of having sex and this apparently has spoiled many people and turned them into pathetic whiners.

Yeah, I'm not arguing in favor of giving men control over stewardship over a fetus they helped create - just pointing out that there's an imbalance of power there... I honestly don't think there's a simple way to fix that problem, and that the best solution is of course to give woman whose body will carry it to term full control. I can't conceive of any other pragmatic solution, sans artificial wombs... and even then, that'd bring up an array of new issues to contend with.

[LurkerPerson]

What? Seriously? Do you want to turn this arguement around maybe, see how it plays out?
If you don't want to get pregnant, take the pill, use a diaphragm, enforce the use of condoms on your partner, or any of the many, many options women have for avoiding pregnancy, or you could always just get an abortion if you catch it early enough. Oh you got pregnant anyways? Well as a woman, you should suck it up and pay up for your obviously personal mistake that was entirely yours to make. What, you expect society to just foot the bill for your illegitimate love child? You had many opportunities to avoid it, if you end up with it it's because you wanted to, for whatever reasons. Maybe because priviledged bitches think it's their fucking right to get laid and have tons of sex, preferably with hot and rich men who they can afterwards leech off of their entire lives on the premise of "think of the chiiiillllldreeeen!". Nowadays, we are free from many of the consequences of having sex and this apparently has spoiled many people and turned them into pathetic whiners.

[KiwiInOz]

Ok, ok, I guess a whole bunch of people around here have forgotten about the causes behind the strict child support laws. Once upon a time, deadbeat motherfuckers decided that abandoning their wives with a couple children behind to get some fresh pussy had no consequences. That shit created a whole bunch of social problems and the situation was overcorrected by passing some tough ass laws.
Bottom line: you don't want to pay child support? Don't get anybody pregnant. You don't get anyone pregnant by cutting those tubes inside your balls. So, grow a pair. Get fixed. Stop complaining about mandates from the court to support the children that are 50% yours.

the end.


PS. Feminists pissed the fuck out of me, but MRAs seem to have more sand on their vaginas.

I endorse this message.

And regarding "psycho women", don't trust your male buddies who are going through a divorce to be rational and unbiased and to give you an objective assessment of the mental status of their partners. In fact, don't trust anyone who's going through a divorce about the other person, *unless* you have seen the fucking evidence yourself.

In the end it all comes down to the characteristics of the individuals involved and what happens when they interact. Writing off all men or all women just because one has had a failed relationship or two is just a teensie bit over dramatic.

[KiwiInOz]

Sorry - that was a general comment in respect to MGTOW etc etc etc - not really an addition to codelette and Trophy.

Back to your scheduled whatever. It's beer o'clock here in Brisbane. Cheers all.

[AndrewV69]

Ok, ok, I guess a whole bunch of people around here have forgotten about the causes behind the strict child support laws. Once upon a time, deadbeat motherfuckers decided that abandoning their wives with a couple children behind to get some fresh pussy had no consequences. That shit created a whole bunch of social problems and the situation was overcorrected by passing some tough ass laws.
Bottom line: you don't want to pay child support? Don't get anybody pregnant. You don't get anyone pregnant by cutting those tubes inside your balls. So, grow a pair. Get fixed. Stop complaining about mandates from the court to support the children that are 50% yours.

the end.


PS. Feminists pissed the fuck out of me, but MRAs seem to have more sand on their vaginas.

I endorse this message.

And regarding "psycho women", don't trust your male buddies who are going through a divorce to be rational and unbiased and to give you an objective assessment of the mental status of their partners. In fact, don't trust anyone who's going through a divorce about the other person, *unless* you have seen the fucking evidence yourself.

I would hazard a guess that there are a fuck ton of men exactly like this in pretty much any MRA forum online. Some of them are seriously pissed and unlikely to be very "rational and/or unbiased".

*shrug*

Some laddie who has had his vagina sanded sans lubricant and who is now soaking in a tub of salt water (which is not exactly soothing to sensitive and abraded private parts) just may not be amenable to polite discourse for the nonce.

YMMV

[debaser71]

Sounds like, "keep your knees together, hun." Or like that stupid American politician said, "put an aspirin between your knees."

[Skep tickle]

So yeah, it sucks to be a guy who didn't want any kids but his partner... decided to keep the baby. Yeah it sucks. But it would suck more for the kid if it grows up with no financial support. So, as a guy, you should suck up and pay up.

But there should be some semblance of fairness; a man shouldn't be expected to pay & pay toward the raising of his child(ren) yet not be allowed to be involved with his child(ren).

In my family's case, not only did my father pay child support, but: (a) he sought & was denied custody; (b) my mom moved 1500 miles away from him, taking 11 yr old me with her, so he rarely got to see me after that; and (c) he ended up paying well more than half of my support (including not only the daily expenses, but things like air fare once or twice a year for me to come out & visit him and a fair portion of my college tuition).

He always tried to keep me out of the middle, but I felt from the moment my mom drove me away for our big move across the country that my dad was getting shafted, and I still feel that was the case.

[LurkerPerson]

Apparently it's "my body my choice" only when you have already mistakenly got pregnant, it's "his cock his fault" before that. Because obviously women have no control whatsoever over their own bodies during sex, being entirely at the mercy of men. Imagine if I were to tell women "hey, don't wanna get pregnant? Get a histerectomy you whiny cunts. Get fixed. Stop whining about "deadbeat dads" who didn't even want to be fathers in the first place but got trapped either deliberately or because of your completely irresponsible behaviour. What, you can't even handle your own bodily functions? What are you a child?"

[Dick Strawkins]

<snip>
And, pray tell, where is he actually not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? Even assuming, for the sake of argument, a position that I don’t at all accept – that that joke was sexist and caused grievous amounts of “splash damage”, if not onerous amounts of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth – how is it that a past “transgression” against today’s “law” that wasn’t “on the books” at that time constitutes that not living “up to the standards they wish to impose on everyone but them”? You think that people shouldn’t be allowed to change their minds, to maybe come up with “better” standards of behaviour than the ones they held in the past? You think that a new law against parking in certain areas should justify going back and fining those who were parked “illegally” in the past? ....

No steerzo, I'm not, nor have I ever claimed to be perfect. …. It's not about perfection, it's about at least fucking trying, and the FTB/Skepchicks lot don't even fucking TRY to abide by the same standards they demand of everyone else. "CUNT IS ALWAYS BAD...unless we say it, then it's *ironic*". Fuck that shit.

Well – welchy – you didn’t really address the question of PZ’s “slut” joke of several years ago. Nor the somewhat analogous question of fining people for “illegally” parking in an area yesterday even though the law making it illegal wasn’t passed until today. Both of which were or are the starting point for this particular issue. And of more than passing relevance to wider issues.

Steersman, you appear to be using the same argument that the Catholic hierarchy used regarding historical child abuse allegations - namely that nobody realized this action was wrong in the past and it's only recently that society as a whole has come to the conclusion that you should never do this - therefore any example that occured in the past can be excused.
The Catholic church tried this with the child abuse allegations.
I have no doubt that apologists for PZ Myers will use the same argument to excuse his actions.

[Steersman]

<snip>
I endorse this message.

And regarding "psycho women", don't trust your male buddies who are going through a divorce to be rational and unbiased and to give you an objective assessment of the mental status of their partners. In fact, don't trust anyone who's going through a divorce about the other person, *unless* you have seen the fucking evidence yourself.

I would hazard a guess that there are a fuck ton of men exactly like this in pretty much any MRA forum online. Some of them are seriously pissed and unlikely to be very "rational and/or unbiased".

*shrug*

Some laddie who has had his vagina sanded sans lubricant and who is now soaking in a tub of salt water (which is not exactly soothing to sensitive and abraded private parts) just may not be amenable to polite discourse for the nonce.

YMMV

Not to diminish - overmuch in any case - the pain and grief that at least some of those men have been put through, one might also point to the many women who have been raped and probably - apparently according to some of the tales I've seen, and alluded to recently in Ally's recent post - have as much pain and grief.

Seems to be one rather large cohort of the walking wounded of both sexes. And not at all easy to decide how much responsibility they each should bear for their predicaments. Maybe there should be mandatory classes before tying the knot ....

[VAXherd]

That's not the claim. The claim is that Rebecca Watson is only (and I use this word strictly in the relative sense) famous for her feminist activism. That's obviously not true, as she's on one of the most popular skepticism podcasts out there. If PZ Myers had a breakdown and became a MGTOW tomorrow, she'd be fine.

Alas, yes.

It's important to understand that Watson is not new. She's been a visible figure in the online/convention skeptic world for about ten years.

The feminism is new. Ironically, the schtick that made her famous was "girl on the internet" and (pseudo) party-slut. But she definitely has a following of her own, and has had for a long time.

Thin qualifications for fame? Not back then. Women were rare; perhaps one in ten or twenty on message boards like this. The girl-to-girl welcome was "prepare to be worshipped." The woman responsible for TAM lured men to come by vowing to appear wearing fishnet stockings. The SkepChick slogan was "smart is sexy" (it was backwards, the logo was a foot in a high-heeled shoe).

Watson managed to make it self-sustaining. Name recognition, famous for being famous.

Despise her as you will, but don't mistake her for anyone else's creation.

-Vh

[Skep tickle]

Apparently it's "my body my choice" only when you have already mistakenly got pregnant, it's "his cock his fault" before that. Because obviously women have no control whatsoever over their own bodies during sex, being entirely at the mercy of men. Imagine if I were to tell women "hey, don't wanna get pregnant? Get a histerectomy you whiny cunts. Get fixed. Stop whining about "deadbeat dads" who didn't even want to be fathers in the first place but got trapped either deliberately or because of your completely irresponsible behaviour. What, you can't even handle your own bodily functions? What are you a child?"

Well, no contraceptive method (short of hysterectomy) is 100% effective, so even if she's trying to be as "responsible" as she can be, pregnancy can result from "PIV" sex.

[AndrewV69]

Well that's because you can't. At least not as long as we are stuck with this biology. And as codelette wrote, if you don't want to risk having to take the responsibility of raising a child, close down the pipes. Problem solved.

Seriously, this is not too difficult to understand:
1) Women have autonomy of their bodies -> they get to choose to terminate a pregnancy or to carry it to the term.
2) Once the baby is delivered, custody and the child support is no longer a gendered issue. It's the kid's fucking right!

So yeah, it sucks to be a guy who didn't want any kids but his partner/fuck buddy decided to keep the baby. Yeah it sucks. But it would suck more for the kid if it grows up with no financial support. So, as a guy, you should suck up and pay up.

Or if you don't want to have babies close down the pipes. Seriously.

Having sex is not just fun. It can have serious consequences. And that's one reason AVfM articles can piss me off. These privileged assholes think it's their fucking right to get laid and have tons of sex, most preferably with hot chicks and they do not consider the fact that even well within the 20th century, having sex was a very serious business with very serious consequences. Sex could kill you through jealousy, archaic laws and morality, fight over mates, and sexually transmitted diseases. Nowadays, we are free from many of the consequences of having sex and this apparently has spoiled many people and turned them into pathetic whiners.

Yeah, I'm not arguing in favor of giving men control over stewardship over a fetus they helped create - just pointing out that there's an imbalance of power there... I honestly don't think there's a simple way to fix that problem, and that the best solution is of course to give woman whose body will carry it to term full control. I can't conceive of any other pragmatic solution, sans artificial wombs... and even then, that'd bring up an array of new issues to contend with.

I was going to respond to Trophy, perhaps not with as much vigour as LurkerPerson did here:
viewtopic.php?p=102155#p102155

So that's that I suppose.

Anyway, one possible solution is a "paper" abortion in which the man can not be held responsible after serving notice he is opposed to the birth of the child.

I am also reminded of a court case in papers years ago where some man took a woman to court to try and prevent her from having an abortion (he failed as I recall although I do not remember the specifics) so some of these situations are not exactly cut and dry.

I can also think of at least one issue with the paper abortion business. People can change their minds. So the guy after a few years now decides he wants to see the child. Now what?

What about the child who starts asking question? Where is my dad? Why can I not see him? You mean I have to wait till I am 18 before anyone will tell me anything?

Right now in Canukistan there are children who being the product of a sperm donor, are fighting with the system to try and find the identity of the donor. They want to know and this seems to be some sort of a "natural" inclination.

*shrug*

Quite a few details that would need to be worked out.

[aweraw]

It's beer o'clock here in Brisbane. Cheers all.

Aww yeah it is. Are you by any chance in the valley of fortitude, Sir Anteater?

[Skep tickle]

Hmm, I didn't express that as I meant to.

Contraception is not 100% effective.

Anyone engaging in heterosexual intercourse who would not want to risk pregnancy should ideally take the most effective measure(s) he/she can to prevent pregnancy.

For men, the 2 options are vasectomy ("drastic" in that it's surgery and should be considered permanent) or condoms (which are only ~80% effective for contraception; also, either partner may prefer not to use them).

So, so often the contraceptive method does effectively become the woman's "responsibility". (Besides which she's the one who'll experience the most immediate and direct consequences if pregnancy occurs.)

Hopefully my foot's not as deep in my mouth in implying "she" is the one who bears "the responsibility".

[LurkerPerson]

That's just as true for men though. But apparently the blame lies mostly on their shoulders, because they are irresponsible man-child hedonists who just want to fuck with no consequences. As...opposed to women, somehow? I'm just having trouble reconciling how heavy the consequences are for women coupled with the overwhelming blame placed on men for unwanted pregnancies. Obviously it's way more onerous for women, they are the ones who are going to have to to abort, or carry it to term, and possibly raise it afterwards (maybe even on their own). So shouldn't the responsability fall on their shoulders? Especially because, again, women have way more options for avoiding unwanted children than men do. That's just a fact.
It all just seems to me an extension of so-called benevolent sexism that considers women to be passive objects on which men act.

[Guestheist]

I never thought I would say this: ElevatorGate just broke a huge story!

See his twitter

[KiwiInOz]

It's beer o'clock here in Brisbane. Cheers all.

Aww yeah it is. Are you by any chance in the valley of fortitude, Sir Anteater?

Indeed I am. Are you not far from said place of iniquity?

[Skep tickle]

@Elevatorgate pointed to a defection from the Skepchick network:

Katie on "Leaving the Skepchick Network", posted w/in past day: http://canadianatheist.com/2013/06/20/l ... k-network/

Most of her post:

1. Rebecca Watson (and a lot of her following, really) is a cyber bully. Plain and simple. For a (semi) recent example, see this. Sara pointed out a very legitimate point but instead of discussing that point in a logical and interesting manner Rebecca just attacks her. I have seen this happen a number of times with Rebecca and other people on the skepchick network. When people point out a legit problem they attack instead of thoughtfully engage.

2. I am a feminist, and I don’t agree with Rebecca et al. as I find them pedantic. In the link in the above point Rebecca picks on the term “ragging”. This sort of stuff is a waste of time, IMO. I just disagree with the level of severity that she takes on things, ie.

3. Go try and disagree with Rebecca or someone on that site (or off the site) and see how fast the skepchick network minions jump on you and eat you alive. Even writing this post my fiance said to me “you’re marking yourself as an enemy” because speaking out against the skepchick network puts a mark on you; it shouldn’t be that way. The skepchicks call for apologies from people all the time but I think they should apologize for being pretty nasty/silly to people (especially in comments; which… I don’t have the time or energy to sort through right now).

4. As an academic I value freedom of speech, good & rich discussions and logical conclusions; this is rarely found on the skepchick network. I don’t value hypocritical crap. They do realize that with the whole Ron Lindsay kurfuffle they are proving the exact point that Lindsay was trying to make, right?

5. I don’t want to be associated with these attitudes and approaches to real life problems. I would rather be associated with thoughtful and clam reactions to what people say. I’ve been known to flip my lid now and then but Rebecca et al seem to do it a lot… and they do it to unexpecting people who do not warrant the wrath of online anger. Her approaches to issues are not academic or logical (like the talk on evolution I linked to above).

6. I’m not a teen so I feel a bit funny writing for teen skepchick…

I just wrote a post defending CFI and I don’t think many people have read it… however when I wrote a post blasting CFI about a year ago they were more than willing to make it front page news. Skepchick runs on drama and I’m getting too tired for that and I no longer want to be associated with such irrational and strong reactions to legitimate concerns and questions arising in the skeptics community.

Katie's "defense of CFI" at Teen Skepchick, posted w/in past day: http://teenskepchick.org/2013/06/20/in-defense-of-cfi/

Katie's page/links at Teen Skepchick, looks like good stuff: http://teenskepchick.org/author/katie/

[AndrewV69]

Maybe there should be mandatory classes before tying the knot ....

Now there is a thought.

I can just see the MGTOWs blocking the entrance, waving signs, screaming and yelling: Dinnae ye feckin idjit! Gonnae no’ dae that!

[Tony Parsehole]

@Elevatorgate pointed to a defection from the Skepchick network:

Katie on "Leaving the Skepchick Network", posted w/in past day: http://canadianatheist.com/2013/06/20/l ... k-network/

Most of her post:

1. Rebecca Watson (and a lot of her following, really) is a cyber bully. Plain and simple. For a (semi) recent example, see this. Sara pointed out a very legitimate point but instead of discussing that point in a logical and interesting manner Rebecca just attacks her. I have seen this happen a number of times with Rebecca and other people on the skepchick network. When people point out a legit problem they attack instead of thoughtfully engage.

2. I am a feminist, and I don’t agree with Rebecca et al. as I find them pedantic. In the link in the above point Rebecca picks on the term “ragging”. This sort of stuff is a waste of time, IMO. I just disagree with the level of severity that she takes on things, ie.

3. Go try and disagree with Rebecca or someone on that site (or off the site) and see how fast the skepchick network minions jump on you and eat you alive. Even writing this post my fiance said to me “you’re marking yourself as an enemy” because speaking out against the skepchick network puts a mark on you; it shouldn’t be that way. The skepchicks call for apologies from people all the time but I think they should apologize for being pretty nasty/silly to people (especially in comments; which… I don’t have the time or energy to sort through right now).

4. As an academic I value freedom of speech, good & rich discussions and logical conclusions; this is rarely found on the skepchick network. I don’t value hypocritical crap. They do realize that with the whole Ron Lindsay kurfuffle they are proving the exact point that Lindsay was trying to make, right?

5. I don’t want to be associated with these attitudes and approaches to real life problems. I would rather be associated with thoughtful and clam reactions to what people say. I’ve been known to flip my lid now and then but Rebecca et al seem to do it a lot… and they do it to unexpecting people who do not warrant the wrath of online anger. Her approaches to issues are not academic or logical (like the talk on evolution I linked to above).

6. I’m not a teen so I feel a bit funny writing for teen skepchick…

I just wrote a post defending CFI and I don’t think many people have read it… however when I wrote a post blasting CFI about a year ago they were more than willing to make it front page news. Skepchick runs on drama and I’m getting too tired for that and I no longer want to be associated with such irrational and strong reactions to legitimate concerns and questions arising in the skeptics community.

Katie's "defense of CFI" at Teen Skepchick, posted w/in past day: http://teenskepchick.org/2013/06/20/in-defense-of-cfi/

Katie's page/links at Teen Skepchick, looks like good stuff: http://teenskepchick.org/author/katie/

Oh, this is going to be good....
https://images.encyclopediadramatica.se ... ou_Say.gif

[aweraw]

Indeed I am. Are you not far from said place of iniquity?

Well, I'm not anymore (home now), but yeah - I work near the show grounds.

[Steersman]

Maybe there should be mandatory classes before tying the knot ....

Now there is a thought.

I can just see the MGTOWs blocking the entrance, waving signs, screaming and yelling: Dinnae ye feckin idjit! Gonnae no’ dae that!

:lol: Yea, there are probably a few bugs to be worked out of that idea before it's ready for prime-time.

But, as your (I think) previous post of the video from the young woman from the UK suggests - as does many of the recent comments, the laws surrounding marriage seem to need a major overhaul.