East Dulwich

[Loz]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Leering: look or gaze in a lascivious or unpleasant way.

Which is not the aggressive "following people down the street and yelling at them" you tried to argue.

> I think it is relevant to point out that displaying certain types of behaviour can lead into others

I think you are heading back to the 'all men are potential rapists' argument again. It's like that horrible 'male gaze' crap attitude from the 70's and 80's (and, sadly, beyond).

[adonirum]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Gawd, when does the bloody teachers' strike end?

Best post in all four pages.

[rendelharris]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Gawd, when does the bloody teachers' strike end?

Sorry, former teacher, no such luck. Funny that earlier today you accused me of stalking your comments and you've deliberately come back not to make a point but just to toss in an insult at me!

[????]

.....in the words of the playground, "you started it"......

[Rook]

I thought id get a bit of gentle relief* from the referendum threads and came in here to have a look.....and Quids and Rendel are goung at each other on here too!!! Made me laugh.

Youd probably be best mates if you met in the pub....

*stop it

[Robert Poste's Child]

Beneath all the righteousness, though, there's an important parallel with the referendum topic: once you open the door to sexist, objectifying comments and tell women who - perhaps for reasons they don't want to share on the forum -feel uncomfortable, that it's just banter they have to accept, not only do those women feel bullied, the what's ok / what's not ok threshold moves to the next level and the thing escalates. As in this thread, in fact.

One of the things I hate most about working in a large corporate environment is that a lot of what used to be overt is covered up that way.

[*Bob*]

Four pages - good going.

This is a lame thread - on a comparatively tame internet forum.

Best course of action imo - leave leave threads to sink as they deserve rather than bless them with four pages.

[Louisa]

*Bob* back in the day we could keep lame threads going for 6/7 pages, without drawing breath. You of all people should never underestimate the power of a ridiculous and overrated thread to spill over into personal arguments, petty squabbling and embarrassingly entertaining drivel.

So, on that note, when is our next cyber battle due to commence? I reckon we could top this thread length with a much less controversial topic. What do you reckon?

Louisa.

[spider69]

A few people would be at a loose end

[*Bob*]

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, on that note, when is our next cyber battle

> due to commence? I reckon we could top this thread

> length with a much less controversial topic. What

> do you reckon?

Can you do next Thursday?

I'll say something about focaccia and we can take it from there.

[Otta]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=focaccia

[aerie]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What doesn't make sense about them? Because you

> disagree with her doesn't mean her comments make

> no sense, they seem pretty straight forward.

Otta : in the first place I did not know KK was female. Secondly, I did not say I disagreed. This was self evident as I did say that KK's 7.11am post made no sense - to me. Then skipped off to work and thought no more about it. So was not ignoring you, but oblivious to your question.

[Otta]

No worries, and fair enough.

[Loz]

aerie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> > What doesn't make sense about them? Because you disagree with her doesn't mean her comments make

> > no sense, they seem pretty straight forward.

>

>

> Otta : in the first place I did not know KK was female.

Erm... so what?

> Secondly, I did not say I disagreed. This was self evident as I did say that KK's 7.11am

> post made no sense - to me. Then skipped off to work and thought no more about it. So was not

> ignoring you, but oblivious to your question.

Actually, you called them 'disagreeable comments'. You say they are disagreeable, but you don't disagree with them? Yeah, right.

[numbers]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Louisa Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > So, on that note, when is our next cyber battle

> > due to commence? I reckon we could top this

> thread

> > length with a much less controversial topic.

> What

> > do you reckon?

>

> Can you do next Thursday?

>

> I'll say something about focaccia and we can take

> it from there.

focaccia? glorified garlic bread much favoured by the ros? quaffing chattering classes.

[TheArtfulDogger]

Oh lord

Was this thread the insperation behind Fergies new single ?

It's very wrong but I had to watch it a few times to come to that decision 🙄

[aerie]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> aerie Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Otta Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > > What doesn't make sense about them? Because

> you disagree with her doesn't mean her comments

> make

> > > no sense, they seem pretty straight forward.

> >

> >

> > Otta : in the first place I did not know KK was

> female.

>

> Erm... so what?

>

> > Secondly, I did not say I disagreed. This was

> self evident as I did say that KK's 7.11am

> > post made no sense - to me. Then skipped off to

> work and thought no more about it. So was not

> > ignoring you, but oblivious to your question.

>

> Actually, you called them 'disagreeable comments'.

> You say they are disagreeable, but you don't

> disagree with them? Yeah, right.

hello Loz : I found this 2 seconds ago. what is your problem with me? What does yeah, right mean? does that mean you have the high ground? you sound like Dionne Bromfield and about the same age. Was this irony? I looked up Yeah Right, the Cambridge Dictionary describes it as : 'used when you don't believe what someone has said'

Perhaps you could now look up 'disagreeable' and its many synonyms and realise that disagreeable and not agreeing do not correspond.

I cannot fathom your hostility, self righteousness and pure aggression toward me and my feelings and opinions : its baffling.

However I will not be disconcerted, but where I come from, posts like yours elicit the wisdom 'you are just showing yourself up' in happy, perceptive scouse accent.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Aerie - you're a month late.

The secret of comedy is timing, but I don't think that excuses you trying to open this up again.