news:bbl520lpns04hn2eidr302uh62cl5p00fr@4ax.com...
> In talk.origins I read this message from "Uncle Davey"
> <noway@jose.com>:
>
> >
> >news:vg5520l207f67vebenv0gpbqfb7eqvjl66@4ax.com...
> >> In talk.origins I read this message from
> >> branchofjesse@hotmail.com (Jerzy Jakubowski):
> >>
> >> >Susan S <otoeremovethis@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> >news:<749220ddnrgqmanl7tfej3g2ko3e4lv89q@4ax.com>...
> >> >> In talk.origins I read this message from "Daniel Harper"
> >> >> <daniel_harper@terralink.net>:
> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >You're such a troll.
> >> >
> >> >heh.
> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >But I'll respond anyway.
> >> >
> >> >shocked, i tel u.
> >> >
> >> >> >People with eating disorders often find
> >> >> >themselves trapped in a vicious cycle, in which low self-esteem or
> >other,
> >> >> >much more serious, mental disorders such as depression lead to
> >"comfort
> >> >> >food" that makes them feel better. As the weight goes up, they are
led
> >> >> >back to their original food of choice to stop hurting, at least
> >> >> >temporarily. The trick is to help break the cycle, certainly with
> >> >> >self-discipline and a vigilance towards one's behavior, but also
with
> >> >> >acceptance of their own essential good nature and with an
> >understanding
> >> >> >that it takes time to break their bad habits. To come barging into
an
> >> >> >acceptance group, yelling like a madman about people eating too
much,
> >does
> >> >> >nobody any good whatsoever.
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Actually gluttony-acceptance is acceptance-abuse.
> >> >
> >> >We should accept many things, but not others.
> >> >
> >> >I am not talking about dissing people who are tring to get to grips
> >> >with their weight problem and finding it hard to get the will power. I
> >> >understand that. The final analysis though, is either the will power
> >> >will have to come or there is every chance that they will suffer all
> >> >the problems of obesity, sucha s wasted youth and shorter old age,
> >> >diabetes and other fat-related health problems, and also they will
> >> >probably not maximise their career and family potential.
> >> >
> >> >If someone is fat, then it is a good idea to make getting slim a very
> >> >high priority in their lives. I wouldn't put it before getting in
> >> >order spiritually, but it would be wrong to tell people, as the
> >> >fat-acceptance cult does, that they are fine the way they are and
> >> >everyone else has to adapt. That's the same doctrine that keeps people
> >> >believing they're okay as they are in other areas and never want to
> >> >change. They don't repent and find Christ for the same reason they
> >> >don't diet - because they believe they are fine as they are. Fat
> >> >acceptance is all about spreading that lie.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> >And yes, food addiction is a disorder, sometimes requiring
medication
> >to
> >> >> >help correct.
> >> >
> >> >No-one's suggesting they shouldn't take the medicine but the
> >> >fat-acceptance movement itself.
> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You
> >> >> >>> denigrate because you do not understand and have a religious
agenda
> >to
> >> >> >>> push onto those who already have problems of their own. I
shudder
> >to
> >> >> >>> think that you and I are both identified with the same religious
> >> >> >>> beliefs.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> >Hmmmn. And you think I don't?
> >> >
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> >> > You have
> >> >> >>> >> >access to the _Internet_; can there be any better proof that
> >people
> >> >> >>> >> >have different standards of beauty and different types of
> >sexual
> >> >> >>> >> >desire than you do? While we can generalize all day about
the
> >> >> >>> >> >various types of body types that are more "attractive" in an
> >> >> >>> >> >aggregate sense, the truth is that sexual attraction is a
> >purely
> >> >> >>> >> >local phenomenon between individuals, and that what Joe Blow
> >and
> >> >> >>> >> >Jane Smith find attractive about one another on a physical
> >level may
> >> >> >>> >> >or may not have anything to do with anything you'd notice.
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> Personally, I think he just wants to put women down to keep
his
> >> >> >>> >> perceived sense of superiority. He has a lot of nerve poking
his
> >> >> >>> >> stinky face in SSFA. He sticks his insults in SSFA and he
will
> >get
> >> >> >>> >> his ass flamed. Simple. Some people should learn to control
> >their
> >> >> >>> >> pets.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > Is 'pets' an abbreviation for 'appetites'? I heartily agree!
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > Bobby, I hope you're following a calorie controlled diet right
> >now.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> This from a man who got his ass handed to him in talk.origins
over
> >> >> >>> massively dishonest behavior and for utterly humiliating remarks
> >towards
> >> >> >>> an honest and decent poster who happened to know more about a
> >subject
> >> >> >>> than he did. Beams and motes, my friend.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> >There's nothing I said as Constance Vigilant to Charles Casey I
> >> >wouldn't say to his face, but it was not right to use a sock for that
> >> >level of debate. I'm through using socks for religious debate.
> >> >
> >> >But this is a pointless distraction, trying to steer off the issue by
> >> >getting mileage out of what I did wrong. Why cannot you just deal with
> >> >the issues, you people? I am sorry that your debating techniques are
> >> >so poor and pathetic.
> >> >
> >> >> >>> >> >And besides all that, some of us find our mates attractive
for
> >> >> >>> >> >things like intelligence, wit, sense of humor, willingness
to
> >love,
> >> >> >>> >> >a caring nature, being good to snuggle with, or putting up
with
> >lame
> >> >> >>> >> >philsophy/biology puns more so than anything that might be
> >termed
> >> >> >>> >> >physical attractiveness. In short, your view of what is
> >attractive
> >> >> >>> >> >is so myopic and based on Hollywood beauty that it's hard to
> >see how
> >> >> >>> >> >you can even begin to understand reality.
> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >> You want a quick dose of reality? Try to sell anything with a
> >> >> >> picture of a fat person holding it up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >The Barefoot Contessa does just fine on the Food Network.
> >> >> >
> >> >> My husband's favorite TV chief. He thinks she looks like a good
> >> >> cook should. More than once, he has suggested *I* should acquire
> >> >> some additional padding.
> >> >
> >> >Get him a Nigella Lawson book. Or a video, if they're available.
> >> >That'll change his mind.
> >> >
> >> I guess you haven't seen too many pictures of Nigella Lawson.
> >> She is not skinny.
> >>
> >> >I certainly advise you to do that, rather than become a shambling
> >> >shoggoth.
> >> >
> >> Once again, you are the little boy misogynist. Boring.
> >>
> >> >I have no doubt in my mind that a woman _can_ be too slim, but that
> >> >doesn't seem to be the problem for most Americans.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >Orson Welles and Alfred Hitchcock were two of the finest filmmakers
of
> >all
> >> >> >time, who were personally identified with their bodies of work.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Plus-size models are often used in modelling large-size clothing
and
> >> >> >maternity wear, and don't seem to hurt sales.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Missy Elliott (spelling?) is one of the finest hip-hop artists of
all
> >> >> >time, and while she's lost weight recently, her early albums were
not
> >> >> >hindered by her weight. Ditto for John Popper of Blues Traveller.
> >> >> >
> >> >> Queen Latifah! She is stunning. I know men and women who just
> >> >> think she looks great.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Halle Berry has many more admirers.
> >> >
> >> >> Davey's problem here is he assume's that his standard is/should
> >> >> be everyone's. Reader's will note that is generally true for all
> >> >> his ideas. And he is that most boring of creatures, the little
> >> >> boy misogynist.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I'm quite the opposite. I love women, and if anything, that's often
> >> >been my weakness.
> >> >
> >> You have not demonstrated any love for women. You have only shown
> >> that you admire the bodies of women who conform to your narrow
> >> definition of attractive. Generally, you denigrate women with
> >> nasty remarks. You have derided individual women here.
> >
> >Yeah, but that was like despite them being women, not because of it.
> >
> >I think if you are thinking about yourself it was only because you
started
> >on me first. Don't dish it out if you can't take it. Remember I'm very
> >outnumbered here, and sometimes I have to get a little tough to defend
> >myself. Especially when it got very nasty and words like 'worms' and
'rocks'
> >and 'shit' were flying around and you were loving it like on the
macDonalds
> >advert.
>
> You can't be talking about me, because I never use words like
> "shit" here unless I am quoting; see above. Look at any post of
> mine, you will not find a single so-called obscenity. If I can't
> find another way to write something, I do not post it.
>
> I am not the only woman here that you have insulted. You probably
> think you are being clever, but in actuality you are merely
> showing your inability to use argument or evidence rather than ad
> hominem.
> >
> >
> >>Your mind
> >> is a sewer and I assure you that the women in t.o. (with the
> >> possible exception of Jo Jean) do not find that attractive in a
> >> man, regardless of the way he looks.
> >>
> >
> >I can't help it if you're all more puritanical than the believers are.
> >That always seems to be the way with militant skeptics.
> >
> >I'm sure you don't like anything dirty happening to you. I'm sure you
> >probably caress your husband in surgical gloves.
> >
> >I'm sure the men in t.o. all find that very attractive, because from what
I
> >can see they're all as prissy and schoolmarmish and puritanical as you
are.
> >
> >Uncle Davey
> >
> Like I said, the little boy misogynist. Yawn. I wish children
> would stop posting to t.o. They just don't have the needed
> vocabulary or the education to support their arguments. Davey
> can't find evidence to support his blather, so he relies on
> protestations of faith. We've seen it all so many times before.
>
> I predict increasingly nasty comments. If I am wrong, it will be
> because Davey can't stand for someone else to be right.
>
> Susan Silberstein
> "A watched pot always boils." Data, ST:TNG
>
You made some nasty comments about me just then, but you see I have the
state control not to retaliate in kind.
I am sure you are, in human terms, a fantastic person, that everybody loves
to be around.
Uncle Davey
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 |
|