(Jan 3, 2020 01:52 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]Deleted post
proof of the real conspiracy
i have lost count of how many strangers, guys & girls who have kissed me(on the cheek) as a gesture of saying hello.
grabby and pully is a bit uncool though
more soo for older or very young people who can be easily injured.
that asian women looked like she was in a state of hysteria
some people want to kiss hands
some people want to pay huge money for a cheep asian slave labour made shirt and buy it, wear it, and give free advertising to some corporate... while attaching their own ego to it.
each to their own.
(Jan 3, 2020 03:32 AM)RainbowUnicorn Wrote: [ -> ] (Jan 3, 2020 01:52 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]Deleted post
proof of the real conspiracy
i have lost count of how many strangers, guys & girls who have kissed me(on the cheek) as a gesture of saying hello.
grabby and pully is a bit uncool though
more soo for older or very young people who can be easily injured.
that asian women looked like she was in a state of hysteria
some people want to kiss hands
some people want to pay huge money for a cheep asian slave labour made shirt and buy it, wear it, and give free advertising to some corporate... while attaching their own ego to it.
each to their own.
That is true, Rainbow. Good points.
(Jan 3, 2020 02:49 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]No one is talking vengeance but you. He shouldn’t have slapped her. She was clearly excited to see the Pope, she wasn’t trying to hurt him. Not sure why you are talking about vengeance.
So a woman shouldn't fend off unwelcomed touching either? I mean, the guy is clearly excited by her, right?
See, you only justify it because it's a man, or the Pope, or a person you don't like.
Anyone laying hands on anyone else without consent is assault. And when they don't let go, anyone has the right to make them let go. It doesn't matter their intent, as humans are not psychic and cannot be expected to see the heart of another.
You, as a woman, have the right to fend off any unwelcome touch, by any means you can, regardless of how well-meaning the violation may seem. You have a right to your own body. Violation, even with the best motives, is still violation.
(Jan 3, 2020 04:00 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ] (Jan 3, 2020 02:49 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]No one is talking vengeance but you. He shouldn’t have slapped her. She was clearly excited to see the Pope, she wasn’t trying to hurt him. Not sure why you are talking about vengeance.
So a woman shouldn't fend off unwelcomed touching either? I mean, the guy is clearly excited by her, right?
See, you only justify it because it's a man, or the Pope, or a person you don't like.
Anyone laying hands on anyone else without consent is assault. And when they don't let go, anyone has the right to make them let go. It doesn't matter their intent, as humans are not psychic and cannot be expected to see the heart of another.
You, as a woman, have the right to fend off any unwelcome touch, by any means you can, regardless of how well-meaning the violation may seem. You have a right to your own body. Violation, even with the best motives, is still violation.
Put this way, it makes sense. You should have stated this from the beginning. I didn't understand where you were coming from with ''vengeance.''
(Jan 3, 2020 04:08 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ] (Jan 3, 2020 04:00 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]So a woman shouldn't fend off unwelcomed touching either? I mean, the guy is clearly excited by her, right?
See, you only justify it because it's a man, or the Pope, or a person you don't like.
Anyone laying hands on anyone else without consent is assault. And when they don't let go, anyone has the right to make them let go. It doesn't matter their intent, as humans are not psychic and cannot be expected to see the heart of another.
You, as a woman, have the right to fend off any unwelcome touch, by any means you can, regardless of how well-meaning the violation may seem. You have a right to your own body. Violation, even with the best motives, is still violation.
Put this way, it makes sense. You should have stated this from the beginning. I didn't understand where you were coming from with ''vengeance.''
As far as I can tell, I've only been reiterating the same thing. Not sure what magic combination of words I've suddenly stumbled across.
I took a peek at the ''banned users'' list on SF, and noticed your name, Magical Realist. Aw, noooo, and it looks to be a lengthy ban. I haven't been following your paranormal or alien threads, I imagine it has to do with those.
Those cause quite a stir over there.
Yeah they always find some new excuse to ban me for twice the amount of time the infractions call for. This time it was for the unpardonable sin of posting quotes on ufos without commentary or analysis. I guess I'm supposed to say, "Here's some quotes on ufos, and they look pretty good to me." or some such BS. In reality I just think those quotes got to James R too much. I mean they are pretty compelling. Anyway, so I'm on a month's leave from there and feel fine. I don't like to stay on one topic for too long anyway.
(Feb 5, 2020 05:21 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah they always find some new excuse to ban me for twice the amount of time the infractions call for. This time it was for the unpardonable sin of posting quotes on ufos without commentary or analysis. I guess I'm supposed to say, "Here's some quotes on ufos, and they look pretty good to me." or some such BS. In reality I just think those quotes got to James R too much. I mean they are pretty compelling. Anyway, so I'm on a month's leave from there and feel fine. I don't like to stay on one topic for too long anyway.
Kudos to you though, that thread has survived a long time. So, maybe they like it, and won't admit it.
I think controversial topics are fun. I've been thinking of posting a thread over there, regarding this article. I think you might like it.
https://www.space.com/25325-fermi-paradox.html
(Feb 5, 2020 05:27 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 5, 2020 05:21 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah they always find some new excuse to ban me for twice the amount of time the infractions call for. This time it was for the unpardonable sin of posting quotes on ufos without commentary or analysis. I guess I'm supposed to say, "Here's some quotes on ufos, and they look pretty good to me." or some such BS. In reality I just think those quotes got to James R too much. I mean they are pretty compelling. Anyway, so I'm on a month's leave from there and feel fine. I don't like to stay on one topic for too long anyway.
Kudos to you though, that thread has survived a long time. So, maybe they like it, and won't admit it.
I think controversial topics are fun. I've been thinking of posting a thread over there, regarding this article. I think you might like it.
https://www.space.com/25325-fermi-paradox.html
From article:
"Other explanations for the Fermi paradox include extraterrestrials "spying" on Earth, ignoring it altogether, visiting it before civilization arose, or visiting it in a way that we can't detect."
I suspect it's something like that. Maybe we're just not very interesting to a superadvanced species. Maybe they only hook up with other superadvanced species that can provide them with useful information and/or technology.
(Feb 5, 2020 05:21 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]In reality I just think those quotes got to James R too much. I mean they are pretty compelling. Anyway, so I'm on a month's leave from there and feel fine. I don't like to stay on one topic for too long anyway.
No, they're not compelling, and James is probably tired of you treating your bare assertions as indisputable fact. Not that any of that will ever penetrate with you.