Hypocrites


Hypocrites and Self-appointed Sages26 Jul 2011 09:00 am

Good news. There’s still a 60% chance you won’t get cancer. Thanks to Charlie.

More people get cancer because their parents survive cancer due to advanced medicine. So the cancer causing genes are being passed on more than ever. And the medicine/care for these cancer patients is escalating costs massively. We are hindering the Darwin Principle. If we stop cancer victims having offspring or ensure the offspring don’t have the cancer genes, this would be better for our future!
Neo

Well, I applaud Neo’s courageous stance. We’re so pathetically sentimental about the sanctity of human life that this sort of brutal rationalism feels like a breath of fresh air. I mean, we human beings are just creatures like any other, aren’t we? Mere mammals. Just one of a whole bunch of organisms pissing and shitting all over the place. Nothing special.

Except, in a way, we’re actually much worse than all the other animals. Because they have no choice but to keep it raw, whereas we have our highly developed intelligence, and thousands of years of civilisation, culture and ethics. We really have no excuse for leaving turds like Neo bobbing about on the surface of the gene pool.

In fact, it’s only thanks to our wishy-washy insistence on attaching equal value to all human life that such a wonky, broken mistake – someone so dangerously antisocial that he uses his own good health as a cosh with which to beat the sick – should be allowed to limp across the landscape of our species’ development without angry crowds of pitchfork-toting yokels following in his zigzagging wake. There’s an irony in this so beautiful that it gives me pleasure. Real, pure, untainted joy. Yes, I’m actually a happier man for Neo’s existence. And that is why I’ll always be better than him.

Now, which of you fuckheads let him out of the lab?

Hypocrites and Permanently Bewildered and Self-appointed Sages08 Mar 2011 09:45 am

Thanks to Mat.

This is zrzavy.

Red meats PERMANENTLY change the DNA of the bowel. Research it!

We should only eat animals which we can kill with our hands (as our teeth witness).

Humans only eat cows and pigs because we developed tools, but they are not our natural foods and we should not eat it.

Listen to the scientists. They spend their lives researching such things. The masses rely on gut reaction.
zrzavy

Sorry, I couldn’t find a scientist. I went to the local… science park or wherever it is that you find them, but I couldn’t find a scientist for love nor money.

A single blob of human faeces smeared across a shiny glass window was a clue as to their disappearance, as were the piles of clothing in the strangely full car park. But I wasn’t to find out their true fate until I went for a walk that weekend and found a colony of scientists who’d decided to follow your infallible reasoning living in trees, eating bark, throwing their own shit at each other and tearing the throats out of squirrels with their bare teeth. The sight of Richard Dawkins wanking in a tree did faze me for a second, but then I remembered what you wrote and just, you know, joined in. My teeth were telling me it was the natural thing to do.

I’d love to write more, but this just isn’t natural behaviour for a human being. I’d rather be dying a lingering death from a sprained ankle and/or squirrel parasite.

Hypocrites13 Oct 2010 09:03 am

HYS distilled. Angry, wilfully ignorant stupidity boiled down to its essence.

wildlancaster wrote:

Now let me think about that one…….NO

Fibber.

Credulous Nincompoops and Hypocrites and Miscellaneous Prats and Permanently Bewildered and Plain Weird and Racists and Self-appointed Sages and Werthers Original Imperialists16 Sep 2010 09:06 am

Thanks to Dave.

Morrissey’s been accused of being a racist, which of course makes it instantly okay to a) openly like Morrissey again and b) insult entire nations. Racism could only get more casual if it was wearing a shellsuit and tucking the bottoms of its pants into Pringle socks.

What inspires me about this is that amongst the chaos there appears to be at least some kind of natural order to the universe.

Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Pakistani, in fact many countries do things we find appalling. There’s nothing we can do about it, it’s their culture. But what we can do, and should have done, is to keep them and their ways out of our own country. Is it too late to do something?
Diane

No Diane, it’s not too late. You can f*** off somewhere else. People like you make me ashamed to be native British.
si

See, there are positive uses for that phrase! Now, if only someone could quote Morrissey lyrics and confuse the fuck out of a passing mentaloid, causing him to offer some shit advice based on complete fantasy, and do it in an easy-to-follow bullet form.

Ouija board, Ouija board….can you help me-ee-ee?
Rad Pitt

Stay away from Ouija boards for three very good reasons
1. do you think spirits, of departed are answering you – think again. You are dealing with something that could cause you a lot of hurt and damage, especially spiritually.
2. Malevolant evil spirts hide themselves in a guise imitating loved ones and so on, having info on them. They are out to delude you.
3. Worst of all, they are out for you to be possessed by these evil spirits, they are not interested in your problems or solving them. They are interested in destroying your soul, locking you up to them.
So Rad Pitt, my advice to you would be to throw away your Ouija board if you have one, preferably set fire to it in a safe place and go speak to a minister or priest. May God lead, guide and protect you.
Nektarios

Knock three times if you’ve ever been sectioned for standing outside Boots offering your own excrement as the body of Christ.

Can anyone honestly say that they aren’t even a little racist? Everyone’s a little racist and everyone’s a little gay.So there.
Also, he is obviously saying this out of anger and nothing more. Lord, if everyone had to make sure nothing they said would offend anyone…we’d be mutes.
Also, I hope PETA drops Moz as well because they are a terrorist organization. It irks me that my beloved Moz promotes them.
eli

Honestly, eli, I can say that I’ve never been convinced of my superiority over another human being based on our differing races. No, I base my superiority complex on provable concepts. For example, I think I’m better than you because you project your unchecked failings onto other people and excuse faulty reasoning based on erroneous comparisons to the perceived norm. When I read the bollocks you decided to share with the world, I didn’t think you were of a different race – I just thought you were some kind of twat. However, I did once try and have a wank over Jedward*, so it’s not all faulty reasoning on your part.

*If anyone wants to borrow that one, let me know.

Curtain Twitchers and Delusions of Grandeur and Hypocrites and Miscellaneous Prats and Outsiders and Permanently Bewildered and Plain Weird and Retired Colonels and Self-appointed Sages and Tax Bores13 Sep 2010 07:30 am

Nation gripped by scandal, Juicy Jenni, Coleen, football, blah blah. Slave to its nature, as a dog eats its own sick, the Mail tackled Juicy Jenigate last week in typical fashion, by publishing a bunch of ‘racy’ pictures accompanied by a bit of hand-wringing and finger-wagging. Which, you’ll note, required the talents of four writers.

But it’s the readers we’re interested in. And in equally typical fashion, their comments run the full gamut from patronising armchair psychology, through sanctimonious prickery, all the way to utter batshit mentalism. Some (most, probably) are simply horny. But almost all agree on one thing: ‘Juicy’ Jennifer Thompson’s most unforgivable crime is being, in their considered opinion, less attractive than Coleen Rooney.

Thanks go to Kris. Commence the unpleasantness.

Its the Beyonce generation ie do anything for money!!
Paul

Does Paul know something about Beyoncé that I don’t, or are his cultural references just very limited? Who knows? Who cares? I don’t. Next…

I hope she’s going to pay tax on that.
With the country’s finances as they are, earnings are earnings, and as her advertised ‘client’ probably avoids heavy taxes by using offshore accounts, it’s only fair she should contribute.
As she would be self-employed (sounds somehow wrong said that way), I suppose she should be able to charge for the pill, or whatever contraceptive measures she uses, BUT she should pay for the medical checkups to make sure she hasn’t caught any sexual diseases.
PeterH

Here we go. Practical advice from PeterH for any budding escorts out there, alongside an apparent suggestion that the service sector pick up any slack left by its wealthier customers’ creative accounting. Which is a great idea. Say next time Bob Diamond pops into the newsagents for some Red Mill, an HMRC official rushes in as soon as the transaction is complete and slaps a big old fuckin’ tax bill on the counter, as Diamond strolls out laughing with bits of corn snack fluttering from his mouth like golden snow. The government gets to pursue those unpaid receipts as aggressively as they like without scaring off the rich people, and the less rich get crushed in the process. Osborne’ll love it.

From the dawn of humanity, women have been the corruptors of men. Everybody remembers it was Eve who ate the apple and began the descent of humanity.
Jeremy Tapsill

Mrs Tapsill find the receipts again, did she?

Lets be honest if it wasn’t for his money he would have to pay to sleep with someone ironically …
Chris Butler

It’s true. I earn a pittance, and prostitutes only ever give me ironic sex.

Women must realise that men like both steak and burger. This escort is Wayne’s greasy cheap burger. Us men like greasy burgers once in a while but we always prefer the steak waiting at home.
Matty Hayes

If this comment isn’t bad enough by itself, you’ll shit when I tell you that Matty is really talking about an actual steak. He’s married to a steak.

The sick fuck.

how do the newspapers get all these pictures off facebook?
tom

Lust = anger
Jeff

tom, presumably, is after tips, but seems fairly harmless compared to Jeff, who I’m a bit concerned about, to be honest. If he isn’t already on some sort of register, can we please get him on one? Before it’s too late.

She has an exotic sexy look about her, but she is definitely not pretty or English looking,-maybe she realizes this and that’s why 1.)she feels the need to sell herself, despite not needing the money, and 2.) is obsessed with her appearance.

Shame on her, poor Colleen.
Miss B

And with unnerving clarity, Miss B has identified the real tragedy of Jennifer Thompson. Loveless childhood? Please! If there is a single, definable root to Thompson’s issues, it’s not looking English enough. If only she’d been born a bit less exotic and sexy, she could’ve had everything by now. Marriage, children, a £400,000 house of her very own husband’s own in which to pace back and forth, trapped, getting ever drunker and more desperate, scratching away at the paintwork until bittersweet freedom arrives in the shape of death or divorce… all of these things could’ve been hers. Damn that exotic, sexy look.

Some people just get dealt a bad hand.

Delusions of Grandeur and Hypocrites and Miscellaneous Prats and Outsiders and Permanently Bewildered and Retired Colonels and Self-appointed Sages and Unfocused Rage18 Aug 2010 07:30 am

You might want to clear your diaries for this morning, because Heidi has sent in this Wagnerian misery cycle from Your Freedom, elegantly composed by a man with an awful lot of time on his sticky hands. He evokes his own train-wreck psyche so vividly you can almost hear him sniffing your chair. He’s a Regular Twat in the making, if he doesn’t cast us all sobbing into endless vortices of despair.

Are you sitting comfortably?

Wight1984.

Your argument is based on this in my view now wholly unjusifed position that women are oppressed.

While this may have been true 100 or more years ago, where is the evidence that they are now?

On the contrary, there’s far more evidence that MEN are repressed.

e.g. the UK pensions age is STILL 65 fo women and only 60 for men.

Ironically as women live several years longer than men on average, many men don’t even make it to 65, so it’s DOUBLY DISCRIMINATING aginst men.

And lookee here, we’ve had FEMINISM for about 100 years and especially in the UK for about 50, but NOTHING IS DONE about this GLARING INEQUALITY.

Women can get a state pension at 60 and men have to wait till they are 65. I wonder why?

Or then we have 100s of soldiers dying in wars or arriving home without the faces they used to have or not as many limbs or in wheelchairs for the rest of their lives, and about 95% to 99% of them are MEN.

Seems to be another INEQUALITY issue that the feminists aren’t talking about.

And then there’s what happens in divorces, with people like Heather Mills waltzing up and taking £25m of their husband’s – in this case Sir Paul McCartney’s – fortune, which it doesn’t appear like they’ve done anything to deserve.

HOw many MEN do we see marrying rich WOMEN and coming away with MILLIONS in divorce settlements?

Let’s even talk simpler everyday things.

Why is it that men on the whole have to ask WOMEN out for dates – and face rejection/humiliation if they are refused?

Why is it that millions of women still think it’s OK not to work and let their husbands bring in the money, like the footballer’s wives?

Whereas if a man did that, he’d be viewed as a total sponger and treated with derision and contempt.

Why is it that if a ship goes down at sea,it will STILL be women and children first into the lifeboats, and if any man caused a woman to die to save himself in such a circumstance, he’d have to live the rest of his life with the title “coward” hung around his neck?

So you are clearly swallowing this LYING feminist propaganda that women are some kind of underclass, when it appears that any OBJECTIVE OBSERVER who came from another planet would fairly soon conclude that it is MEN who are the underclass and women are the rulers of this strangely physically stronger, but yet still mostly enslaved and dominated other gender.

I’m now going to explain to you, what your probable REAL problem is, and who is responsible for it, and IT ISN’T MEN.

Men and women basically have simple underlying goals in life despite all the superficial complexities which muddy the waters, and hide the truth of what is really going on despite all appearances.

i.e. men are seeking a mate to make them feel comforted, respected and loved, and have a SEX partner.

If a particular man can afford it, or is considered a “dominant male” as they say, he may well have SEVERAL such “mates” either sequentially or even at the same time.

Women on the other hand also have A BIOLOGICAL MISSION, which once again is basically to find a mate, but this time with the aim of reproducing.

They want to build a nest and have chicks in it.

They want as nice and as protected a nest as they can get of course, and they also want the most esteemed mate they can find to produce the highest quality offspring and maximum degree of protection.

It makes me laugh to know, that one of the most esteemed (probably THE most esteemed) female author in literary history is Jane Austen who wrote Pride and Prejudice.

And do you know what the first line is (approximately) of that book?

She writes “It is an indisputable fact that a man with a fortune and X thousand acres of land must be in need of a wife.”

Her whole book is basically a treatise on the art of manipulation/seduction of a WEALTHY MAN/MATE desired by a woman, and the goal is to get his worship and for him to beg her hand in marriage.

i.e. the same old BIOLOGICAL MISSION of finding the best quality mate and feathering one’s nest to the optimum degree.

And WOMEN THEMSELVES have rated this in polls as the best novel in history.

So let me explain what this cry of “inequality against women” is really all about.

The feminists – due to their own psychological problems caused by unhappy childhoods – have brainwashed a large proportion of the rest of women into believing that this role of WIFE/MOTHER is some kind of repressed slavery, that has no real importance, significance, when in fact it’s the ONLY thing that really matters in the majority of women’s lives – it is THEIR BIOLOGICAL MISSION.

But finding a mate and having children is also quite a scary mission to carry out, it’s not easy to get the man women really want as Jane Austen explained, men can be very obstinate and relucatnt to commit, and childbirth can be scary, and women then lose their freedom because they have to look after their children, and in most cases then put their own needs in 2nd place.

So it’s very easy for women also to hum and har about it, to ask themselves if that is REALLY what they want to do, and of course the more “intellectual” they are, the more they’ll tend to debate it endlessly, rather than JUST GET ON WITH IT like the lower class, less intellectual women do.

And in that INTERIM, UNDECIDED period, in steps the feminist propagandist, who says that being a wife and mother isn’t the answer, and that a woman should prove she can do anything a man can do: – she should be a nuclear scientist, a poet laureate, a big business chief, an MP or even prime minister, and show actually that women don’t even NEED men, men are nothing really, so they aren’t to be FEARED.

Because women DO fear MEN, just as men even before feminism have lived in fear of women.

Because when another person has WHAT YOU NEED, that gives them POWER OVER YOU.

So in the case of men, they need women as sexual partners – they’ve got this awesome and overpowering biological desire which suddenly just appears TOTALLY UNEXPECTEDLY in their teens – and they also want the SOCIAL EESTEEM of having a girlfriend/wife, or they are considered “losers”.

And then men also have what WOMEN need, which is basically again the ability to give them children via sex,and also to give them esteem, give them a place in society, make them respected by other women, who will enviously look on if they get a “trophy man” like the footballer’s wives do.

Or otherwise the man ends up a sad old bachelor who other men look dubiously at, who clearly “couldn’t get a woman”, or the woman ends up as the “old maid” who no man apparently wanted.

So instead of facing up to the human and animal level biological problem of FINDING A MATE, the feminists divert women, especially young ones, down the avenue of saying MEN ARE THE PROBLEM, that the cause of women’s problem is the behaviour of men, which of course in the sense I’ve explained it is true, just as men’s problem is the behaviour of women.

Because each sex is actually trying to CONTROL the other, in fear of the possiblity that the other gender will use their POWER against them.

So tradiationally men use to congregate in groups, and to some extent still do, and mock women.

Not because they REALLY disrespected them, believed them unequal, but because when you are IN FEAR of somebody, you try to pretend they don’t have the power over you that they actually do.

So all the feminists are doing is basically the same but as regards MEN.

Trying to cut men down to size, humiliate them, so they don’t have to feel AFRAID of them any more.

And naturally because ALL women have got some of this fear, just as all men have some fear of women, lots of young women especially who haven’t yet “got their man” and are in fear of whether they ever will, are easisly persauded to join in the “protest” about the fact that they can’t control men as much as they’d like.

But even worse, by the feminists proposing the solution for the girl/woman who is unhappy about her inability to control the men she desires to, who won’t do what she wants them to do , that they should COMPETE FOR JOBS with men, show they can outdo men in the workplace, they gives a huge problem to a lot of women who DO NOT wish to compete with men or even necessarily enter the workplace at all.

Women in the past were not EXPECTED to be in the workplace, and certainly not in any difficult or responsible job, they were basically just awaiting the day they would marry.

So even if they had some kind of a job as nurse, secretary, teacher or whatever, it was only ever considred to be temporary, except perhaps in older age when their children didn’t need them any more, and they could retake whatever they wanted, for both the money and the feeling of being part of society, involved and contributing in some way.

e.g. many wealthy women who don’t need to work, and probably don’t WANT an ordinary job, because they don’t want to do things they aren’t interested in, or be bossed around, get involved in charity fundraising and so on.

But the problem is that a lot of women are not AMBITIOUS, PUSHY, OUTGOING, they do not WANT to shove their way into “the big bad world” they are NATURALLY reserved, or shy, and there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s party of their natural self-protective instinct.

Getting a job is not just an activity, it’s being forced to interact with A SOCIAL GROUP, with its PECKING ORDER, and few people who work will not be subject to some kind of abuse or even overt bullying.

You are forced to be with people you often don’t like and almost certainly would never choose as friends.

Envy, competition, rivalry, dislike or even outright hate, and all sorts of other ugly emotions, run rife in the average workplace, so it’s a potentially very threatening environment for a woman, especially a more refined, cultured or sensitive one.

And how have the feminists addressed this problem of women?

They have said, if YOU as a woman can’t hack it in the workplace, if you can’t get a job like men do, if all you can do is keep house and feed babies, you are INADEQUATE.

You should be ASHAMED OF YOURSELF.

You are letting down WOMEN, in their “heroic struggle” to get equality with men, you’re letting down all the millions of women who have been abused, repressed and brutalised by men throughout the ages.

And that’s all NONSENSE.

Throughout the ages, the REAL truth is that as now, MOST men have been the servant, slaves and worshippers of women, and the only women who have complained about it are the ones who CAN’T GET A MAN TO SERVE AND WORSHIP THEM.

e.g. we don’t see footballer’s wives attending feminist study groups.

So I don’t know how old you are, but the reality for young women is simple.

There’s nothing wrong with you getting a job if you want one, but bear in mind there’s a man/boy out there, who’s trying to make his way in life, and HE is your potential mate.

He – and I’m in contact with young men who at times let me into their private thoughts – believes that to be worthy of YOU, being YOUR mate, he has to have A GOOD JOB.

And so if YOU take the job that HE NEEDS to be a respected member of his community, and thus to be deemed worthy of marrying (eventually) YOU, then when it comes to the time you want a mate, HE no longer exists for you.

He is getting drunk in a bar somewhere, bemoaing his failure, or maybe even commited sucide after his failure to SUCCEED.

Do you know, yet another “equality” is that between 4 and 6 time as many MEN/BOYS worldwide are committing SUICIDE than women/girls?

So clearly MEN/BOYS are now under some kind of presure that women/girls are not.

And that pressure is to SUCCEED.

Almost ANY woman can find SOME man or other, on her own level of looks/class/intelligence to mate/marry with, and SHE does not need a job.

But for a man, if he doesn’t “get that job” he is NOTHING, society regards him as a failure, a loser, somebody who should go hang his head in shame, and yes, it might well be better for himself and everyone else if he decided to “end it all.”

And that’s no joke – that’s EXACTLY what numerous young men and even older ones rejected by the system are doing, and even if they aren’t going that far, millions have now gone into addiction to prescripton or illegal drugs.

Have you not seen all the endless DEMANDS to legalise cannabis on here?

What’s THAT all about?

And I can guarantee you few or no women are starting those threads, or supporting them, the drug problem – prostitution aside – it is almost entirely a problem affecting MEN.

Women who use drugs – alcohol and tobacoo excepted – are usually only dragged into it if their partner does, and otherwise wouldn’t do so, except for the posh little rich girls who do cocaine and so on, desperatly seeking attention for their unloved and miserable lives.

So THIS is what’s really going on out there: men/boys being destroyed, and feminists smugly laughing at it vengefully out of their hate for everything male, and INNOCENT women/girls in the middle getting conned into believing that the male is their natural enemy who is suppressing them, when actually he is what they most need as a friend, protector and mate.

It’s appalling, and anybody can see this is what is really going on, if they stop looking through the eyes of prejudice and hate, which emotional states are mainly just brought about by FEAR.

AS I’ve said, boys/men are JUST AS AFRAID, or more so, as women/girls are of men.

Life is scary, uncertain for all of us, and demonising and scapegoating the other gender as the feminists are doing, is no way to security for any of us, quite the opposite, causing estrangement, competition and hate, between those beings – men and women, boys and girls – who should be cooperating, supporting, befriending and loving one another.

Like I said, most womem who get assaulted behave in such a way that they effectively bring it on themselves.

You don’t agree that, because you think women should have a freedom in society that is just not realistic, and no SENSIBLE women (you know, most of whom have NEVER been sexually assaulted) agree with YOU.

If you don’t want women to get raped, it’s REALLY EASY.

I’m going to give an even longer list of things women SHOULDN’T DO now, seeing as you have now annoyed me.

1. Don’t go in bars alone or even with just one girlfriend unless you are getting WELL KNOWN taxis to and fro door to door and preferably a relative or friend instead of a taxi.

2. Don’t walk in any public area on your own. You can get away with it in crowded city centres, as long as you stick to the CROWDED areas, avoid quiet streets where you could be dragged into a back alley or whatever without anyone noticing.

(university campuses tends to have a lot of these dodgy little quiet parts, and hence we find a lot of girl students get attacked).

3. Don’t dress in public in any provocative way. Not EVER. When you are married, your body is FOR HIS EYES ONLY.

4. Avoid mixed sex work places, and if you have a choice, don’t work at all, because as soon as you do, if you’re attractive, every male in the workplace will see you as an object of quarry/sexual fantasy.

If their parents can’t, THE STATE should support unmarried girls who need the money with basic benefits, and such girls/women should be entitled to refuse any work or not work at all if they please, as any form of work is a potential threat to their security.

If you must work, pick a female dominated environment like a hospital, typing pool or a girl’s or junior school.

If you expose yourself to public view on a routine basis, you will become an object of fantasy to any male who is able to see you regularly (but if you’re mostly covered up, that won’t happen much even if you are visible in face).

5. Don’t ever go alone on buses or trains if you can avoid it, or certainly not regularly or in any place you are not familiar with.

6. Don’t get drunk and incapable, because you think you can trust your girlfriends, but you may be wrong when they too have had a lot to drink.

7. Don’t have men friends except relatives, foolishly imagining you can have an “only friends” relationship with a boy/man, because any male friend of your own age if he finds you attractive (which you may not realise) will see you as a potential mate, and thus you can’t guarantee he won’t try to make the “friendship” physical sooner or later. It’s that old thing called his BIOLOGICAL MISSION “popping up” again.

8. Don’t tease with or flirt with men ANYWHERE. They’ll imagine you might want to have sex with them, when maybe all you were doing was trying to get served first at the bar, or “being friendly.”

9. Find a mate/marriage partner via one of your relatives or friends, (or some civilised group you can safely be part of like a church or whatever) and don’t EVER agree to go out with a man who you haven’t checked out thoroughly, and you wouldn’t see as long term relationship/marriage material.

10. Don’t go to university or college after 16 and attend a single sex girls’ school before 16, not a dreaded and dangerous comprehensive, full of boys all hoping to sneak a peek at you in the showers or be the first to rob you of your “virtue.”

If you want a degree, go to a girl’s only college or do an Open University degree.

We need to open some WOMEN ONLY universities/colleges for women who want to be doctors or teachers etc., and don’t want to be harrassed at such an early age.

You can stil have a social life amongst family and trusted friends.

Just make sure you are always (when out) part of a LARGE and (adequately sober) GROUP.

There you are – there’s govt helper’s 10 commandments.

If you follow ALL of those, your chances of getting even sexually assaulted, let alone raped, are almost zero.

PS and if you protest at any of those, you think you should have “more freedom”, undestand that boys and men have to be careful of thier movement too, not usually for fear of rape, but for fear or violent assualt, that can happen to men in all kinds of place – e.g. pub toilets – you wouldn’t even dream about, and for very flimsy reasons (e.g. somebody decides “you gave them a dirty look” or “you were ogling my girlfriend/wife”)

So please GROW UP and realise men have got LOADS of problems like women have too, and have to take LOTS of care with their own personal safety, just like women do.

You only have to read the news, and you see that grown men get beaten to death on a fairly regular basis by gangs of one kind or another, usually for some flimsy reason like complaining about the noise they were making or whatever.
govt_helper

I’m assuming govt_helper has recently suffered some rejection/humiliation himself.

And by ‘assuming’, I mean ‘hoping’.

Hypocrites and Tax Bores06 Aug 2010 10:50 am

Who would you give your money to? Going to be a tricky one this. For obvious reasons ‘friends’ and ‘loved ones’ aren’t feasible, and ‘strangers’ might turn out either poor, foreign or both. So who then? Straight in first, setting the bar high from the outset, is our shiny new friend Toad in the Hole.

Toad In The Hole wrote:
Who would you give your money to? Future me.

Future you? That feckless arse? Never does a stroke of work, just sits there pretending to be over sixty-five, sponging off past and present you. Probably best you ram a butternut squash or two up your now-jacksie, wreck the lazy fucker’s bowels for him. Revenge is sweet.

D G Cullum wrote:
I give my money to me as I have very little to live on like many people how many billionaires do I know none but I will give them my address if they wish to send me a few thousand dollars. Any money they give they get back in taxes and it will not get them into heaven any quicker than anyone else. Why allow the media to make a big deal out of it its to much many anyway and the one that has made it sees it different than the kids who get to really spend it. Money is nothing it what you do with it so give it all away those rich people spend it on others and be generous about it after all you can not take it with you when you go and maybe someone will remember you for soemthing else and not just for being rich.

See, you didn’t think anyone could beat “future me”, did you? Well you didn’t reckon with the “present me”/”please Mr. Buffet could I have some more?” one-two combo, did you? There’s obviously a lot of talent here, but occasionally, someone will drop the ball and slip into a sense of charity for, like, other people.

UKcerberus wrote:
As a live billionaire, the very first thing I would do is leave this country!!
I would then help as many of the victims of UK governments as much as I could, but from afar. Victims of the UK’s appalling justice (sic) system who have no redress just because they are poor would get help with legal fees. The poverty-stricken children – yes, British children – would benefit from having at least a decent meal every day. Finally, I would ensure that no British child went to bed frightened or unloved. I would do that by sponsoring a private social service – highly skilled and motivated people who would be only concerned with child welfare, and not how easy a time and how politically correct their actions are.

It’s rather a clever happy medium really. You get to show your deep love and affection for sickening, uninhabitable Britain, and heartless disdain for Other Countries, your happy new home-sweet-home. Plus the more you donate, the less chance there is you’ll spend it and accidentally contribute to the local economy. My only worry is that if you do it this way, it might be mistaken for something ghastly like overseas aid and a foreigner might get his garlicky, unshaven mitts on it. Best just stuff all your imaginary billionaire-money in a big sock then have a wank into it.

Curtain Twitchers and Hypocrites and Racists21 Jul 2010 10:19 am

Thanks to Malcolm. Some tedious bell-end, this time in the Derby Evening Telegraph, flogging the old bend-the-struggle-against-Hitler-round-to-fit-racism horse again.

RECENTLY, we commemorated the 70th anniversary of the Dunkirk evacuation.

For many veterans, the memories of the carnage have been difficult ones. A number of veterans said that, had the invasion not been repelled, Great Britain would be speaking German today.

No disrespect to our war dead, but I am now finding it increasingly difficult to understand the many foreign languages now spoken in Derby.

Dennis Monk

I bet not many of them are German though, are they? I love how these idiots always imagine the worst thing about living under the iron grip of National Socialism would have been having to do a relatively easy language in school. Yeah, so a few people get enslaved, tortured and gassed but I have to spend an hour or two a day clearing my throat. Who’s the real victim?

Plus think how many other ways we’re disrespecting the war dead. They gave their lives for our freedom not to be a racist batty-crease, but Dennis Monk is still a racist batty-crease. I’m sure someone somewhere once gave their life for our freedom not to push racist batty-creases from Derby into wheat threshers, but if there was one and Dennis Monk was looking the other way, I’d still be sorely tempted. Makes me sick thinking about it. Hypocrites.

Curtain Twitchers and Delusions of Grandeur and Hypocrites and The Regular Twats and Unfocused Rage11 Jun 2010 07:30 am

O mankind, thy nature be thy downfall!

See, the problem with us humans is our duality and shit, the eternal raging battle between our loftier ideals and our raw, bestial urges. For every word of Baudelaire there’s at least two thousand glued-shut copies of Razzle littering the hedgerows of Lancashire alone.

And nowhere is our species’ tragic condition more evident than in these two generous slices of pungent cheese, thoughtfully cut by Randy from some HYS nonsense about some telly programme or something.

There is nothing to which television shows will not sink to attract bigger audiences: Ok, the lowest common denominator is where the action is, tells us a lot about our so-called civilisation!
ian cheese

An admirable stance, Mr cheese! But then, having spent all of three minutes drooling through his vibrating Bundy eyeballs at Corin’s norks, he gets the horn and we see his high horse bolt from under him to dry-hump a Bravissimo catalogue.

I hope the female wrestler is a lesbian & make love to the beauty queens & the dwarf will be the voyeur.
ian cheese

Christ alone knows how he managed it, but if you look at the above post in its original context, you’ll find it’s actually stained with gobs of tear-diluted jism.

Hypocrites and Plain Weird and Racists24 May 2010 11:33 am

Visit Openbook for all your facebook-status-to-yell-at-the-world needs. Liberal Conspiracy tried out “I’m not racist but…“. I tried it with “not racist but” and ‘paki’*.

POLICE ARE GOING AROUND CLUBS AND PUBS SAYING WE CAN’T WEAR OUR ENGLAND TOPS FOR THE FOOTIE AND GOTTA TAKE DOWN OUR FLAGS AS ITS UPSETTING PEOPLE THAT DON’T COME FROM HERE! NOW IM NOT RACIST BUT, THIS IS TAKING THE PISS! THIS IS OUR COUNTRY AND WE NEED 2 MAKE A STAND IF YOU DONT LIKE IT DONT BE HERE! WOULD YOU REMOVE YOUR TURBAN OR BURKHA BECAUSE IT UPSETS ME? THOUGHT NOT, IF YOU AGREE POST THIS AS YOUR STATUS. IF ANY PAKI TOLD ME TO TAKE MY ENGLAND SHIRT OFF I WOULD SPLATTER HIS PICKAXE NOSE…

It’s very easy to make fun of people who aren’t racist but, but I think we might be misinterpreting the phrase. To a layman, it seems like “I’m not racist but…” is a rubbish pre-emptive justification for saying something massively racist in an age where it’s unacceptable. But to the insider, it’s just a social formality, like “I’m fine thanks” when you’re sobbing uncontrollably and a little bit on fire. “I’m not racist but…” is probably just how racists clear their throats.

*Oh and what with prejudice being collective and everything, it works even better plural.

Next Page »