
maxxi
Member-
Posts
5,543 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by maxxi
-
bacon............ and a strawberry mivvi
-
Oh right - then yes I think it was said with a sense of foreboding regarding the oncoming winter but also with a kind of 'told you so' expression which doesn't seem to make sense - but they could be a grim lot down there.
-
That sounds far more likely PG
-
I thought Moos' meant that when everything in sight was covered in a frosty white then the door covered in shite (presumably fresh and brown?) would stand out - maybe meaning to stand out from the crowd in a less than positive way? (Your Majesty is like a stream of bat's piss etc etc)Can't quite get to why a door would be so covered but - hey it's the countryside right?
-
I have been to Nunhead. It's over there... *points*
-
OH just rang from London Bridge to say lightning strike hit some signals around N Dulw. which means no trains to ED or beyond at moment.
-
Just heard from OH trying to get late train fromn London Bridge that the earlier lightning strike means that right now there are no trains to ED and beyond. (Fri 10 50pm)
-
True - but you wouldn't expect to be attacked for it either would you? Or having been attacked have society tell you it was your fault. *exits to pub dressed as a virus*
-
Damn. Opened this thread thinking it was something entirely different.
-
My whole line that you partly quoted was: "Why must a woman expressing her sexuality be seen as a provocative act for which preventative measures need to be taken?" A woman may choose to express her sexual promiscuity and permissiveness, she may even wish to shout it from the rooftops. If you think that women who behave like this think little of themselves or are obsessed and have an inferiority complex that is an opinion you are entitled to as is everybody else - but no one is entitled to take that expression as permission for any and everyone who cares to to attack, violate and have sex with the woman without her express consent.
-
StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Maxxi > > Love your posts, etc. But yes male on male rape > is prevalent and exists within a similar > framework. Ie.. Well you were in such and such a > bar, you looked like such and such and said blah > de blah > > By sheer dint of volume, women suffer far far > more. But the MO is the same regardless of > victim's gender > > (Not sure that's what mr medic was getting at, but > I think its what you were asking about) Accepted absolutely - and male rape victims deserve the same protection but have never heard of anyone in wider society or representatives thereof (police/courts/press etc) blaming the male rape victim for wearing provocative clothes. The rapist might use the arguments you suggest but they do not have the same purchase in society as women in slutty clothes 'asking for it'. It isn't just about rape victims but about every person's right to dress how they like without society telling them they are making themselves a victim.
-
-but could possibly be distracted by a bell?
-
Who Do You Love - IH
-
Quote: Why must a woman expressing her sexuality... "Can you explain what you think the male equivalent is and what it means?" Can you explain why that is relevant? Unless I've missed a slew of female on male rape attacks lately there IS no male equivalent to a woman's choice of attire as an expression of her sexuality being blamed for any violent sexual attack on her. There is gay bashing and there have - historically - been attacks on males by other males for wearing the wrong kind of tribal clothing (mods/rockers punks/teds etc) but I don't believe there is an equivalent state of affairs where a man is attacked and raped and he has been held partly or wholly responsible for the attack because of what he was wearing. If you believe differently I'd be interested to hear your reasons. ETA: this is in regard to Medic's last post
-
That last blast (30 secs ago) has set off car and shop alarms on LL - has the rapture arrived?
-
Chuggers have been in operation near the co-op for months now on and off - I usually bark "No!" the moment they open their mouths - short and sweet and I don't even have to break stride. To rub it in I may stop and buy a Big Issue and exchange a few pleasantries with the vendor before moving on.
-
She da Baddest - J Deuce (featuring Sammy)
-
"The analogy is only used to highlight that there are precautions that can be taken IN SOME INSTANCES which will make a difference." Leaving the analogy of women as property to one side the point is SURELY that a women should never have to take precautions. To presume otherwise is to treat rape as an inevitability much like a spring shower and that 'sensible clothes' for women (with a can of mace perhaps) can act as an umbrella. Why must a woman expressing her sexuality be seen as a provocative act for which preventative measures need to be taken?
-
Is there not a case for not dressing like a 'slut' (whatever that means)so as not to provoke an unwanted reaction? Are you by any chance a Canadian police officer in your spare time?
-
Jeremy Wrote: -... while I sympathise with the underlying > motivation, I'd question whether this is the best > way to make the statement. I don't see how wearing > a short skirt and referring to themselves as > "sluts" can be even slightly empowering. Seems to me the very idea that one can call someone a slut (dict.def. someone of loose sexual morals/sexually promiscuous) based on their attire is the same as saying that a woman in a burka is a model of morality and fidelity and is only valid from the point of view that one disagrees with sexual permissiveness and this kind of morality and/or believes women have no right to express their sexuality without suffering 'consequences. Sluts come in all attires, sexes and sexual persuasions and the slutwalk is not just daring men and women of a more conservative bent to call women sluts because of their clothing but daring them to follow that up with condemnation of such dress/behaviour as though it caused violence towards women in and of itself. There is a sliding scale of disappproval from some men towards the way a woman expresses herself ranging from: "Oh, you're, er, going to the party dressed like that are you?" to "Cover your face you daughter of a whore!". Slutwalk will hopefully make some men think about their own attitudes to women dressed as 'sluts' - i.e.that they retain the same right to safety and freedom from molestation and violence as a woman in a tweed twinset.
-
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRENNaHzT-bNQBDb76ChTlw0UGkqcO7UAX_NXx8NvQC1NI14VypoQ
-
My grandmother used to say something the meaning of which still eludes me: "Frost put the taters down, wind blew the candle out." (said with Somerset accent).
-
A lot is made of the witchcraft in Macbeth and that being the reason it is unlucky to say the name but it also - as a lot of theatrical superstitions do - had a more down to earth origin. In the dim and distant past the one production a theatre company that was about to go bust could put on to guarantee 'bums on seat' and drag in some revenue so, if you heard it being mentioned the odds were that you would soon be out of work so it was unlucky to mention it. Similarly whistling backstage was unlucky not as it annoyed the spirits but because most stage workers were ex sailors who were used to sheets and rigging and carried out orders based on blasts from a bosun's whistle so any unsuspecting fellow whistling on or back stage could cause a stagehand to let drop a weight/bar/sandbag etc which could fall on and kill the whistler.
-
As a tenant you will usually be entitled to a period of notice in writing before any work is carried out which affects any part of the property or requires access to any part of the property for which you pay rent unless it is considered an emergency. A leaking roof could count as an emergency as the extent of the leak would be impossible to determine without using the ladder. If scaffolding goes up you will probably find that your landlord has been told or will be told and it is his/her duty to tell you, andf no you do not have any choice in the matter as it should clearly state in your lease/tenancy agreement.
-
OliviaDee Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i knew the book thief was going to be bad when the > fly cover fell over to reveal a picture of the > writer looking smug and sanctimonious. right there > i decided he had nothing to say i wanted to hear. > why do writers/publishers think we need pictures? > Bad bad idea.. and i have been proved right - am > stuck on p34 for about a week. what boring, twee, > saccharin crap. it's about to join the life of pi > as one of the few books i couldn't finish. and > i'll give anything a go. Hear, hear and a double hear, hear (that being a hear, hear, hear, hear) with regard to writers in newspapers. I have more than once enjoyed a book without knowing shit about the author and then - on choosing another by same - been put off by the smug or carefully casual or irritatingly bohemian photo they insist upon (the 'look up' as though momentarily surprised by the camera makes a reader want to scream). The same goes for writers in newspapers - used to be only columnists like Sue Arnold but now they're all at it. Stop it! We don't give a toss what you look like.
East Dulwich Forum
Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.