quote:

---

I am fed up with extremist lunatics trying to tell me how I should relate to people who claim they are not heterosexual.

Henceforth I refuse to use the terms 'gay’, 'homosexual', 'lesbian', 'trans-gendered', or any of the other terms currently used to describe people who are not heterosexual.

I also refuse to use the term ‘sexual orientation’. We heterosexuals have a built in urge to seek out a mate of the opposite sex and ordinarily do not need a compass and map reading skills to do so. Leave me to discover and enjoy my sexuality in peace.

I am tired of people telling me in one breath that they are not heterosexual and deserve to be treated as the unique and special people they are and in the next breath telling me that they must be treated as equals and are the same as I in every respect. Life is for living and loving. I will not join those on a self-imposed odyssey of sexual angst.

I am tired of ‘gay parades’ and misplaced “pride” in vulgar displays of obscene sexuality unsuited to public displays to a general audience that includes minors and children. We have no reason to allow people who are not heterosexual to commit public acts that would have ordinary citizens facing sanctions for inappropriate public behaviour.

People who are not heterosexual are no more special or unique than heterosexuals. They are ordinary human beings with all of the combinations of potential frailty and nobility that the human condition entails; no more and no less.

I will not longer tolerate ‘debate’ respecting alleged rights of people who are not heterosexual using language invented by those who seek to impose their values on me and rules of political correctness created by unseen, unelected and unrepresentative advocates for those who are not heterosexual.

Svend Robinson and Scott Brison claim that they are not heterosexual. That hardly makes them expert in the human condition or puts them in a position to dictate to society how we should relate to our fellow citizens. Compared to the oddities of others who do have serious disorders or are dysfunctional, their not being heterosexual is not a worthy topic of discussion.

I challenge you to take the next article you read on people who are not heterosexual and replace all the terms for ‘sexual orientation’ with “not heterosexual”. Read the amended article again and you will see how silly this debate has become.

When you consider that the declaration that someone is not heterosexual is the equivalent of a declaration that he or she is not Asian, African, Caucasian, European, Aboriginal, East Indian, Arabic, blue eyed, brown eyed, green eyed, blond, brunette, red-headed, tall, short, obese, svelte or any combinations thereof. We are all not something; perhaps even not several things. So what!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hinterland:
Gir, why is this person so angry? Oh, well...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hinterland:
Gir, why is this person so angry? Oh, well...

---

The reason it's offensive to call a gay person "not heterosexual" is because you're assuming that "heterosexual" is the correct standard, and "not heterosexual" as a deviation from that correct standard.

quote:

---

...Not that I should give this any attention at all

---

quote:

---

...if he's so upset over having to learn new terminology, then maybe he should just not bother talking about gays, lesbians, and bis at all.

---

It's about being able to rent or buy the home of your choice.

It's about being considered equally when applying for employment.

It's about freedom to love who you damn well please.

It's about freedom to marry who you damn well please and having all the rights and privileges that go along with that(obligations also of course).

It's about not being called a faggot in your workplace.

It's about not being bashed.

It's about equal rights and an egalitarian society.

It's about common decency.

[ 23 January 2004: Message edited by: JimmyBrogan ]

quote:

---

It's about being able to rent ... the home of your choice

---

Agree

quote:

---

...buy the home of your choice

---

I have honestly never heard of a case where someone refused to sell a house to another because the buyer was gay.

quote:

---

It's about being considered equally when applying for employment

---

None of your friggin business.

quote:

---

It's about freedom to love who you damn well please

---

Nothing stops that now.

quote:

---

It's about freedom to marry who you damn well please and having all the rights and privileges that go along with that(obligations also of course).

---

Agree

quote:

---

It's about not being called a faggot in your workplace.

---

A fist in the nose fixes that quite quickly.

quote:

---

It's about not being bashed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:

"It's about being considered equally when applying for employment"
None of your friggin business.

---

I presume you're saying that people should never let on to prospective employers that they're gay. While this makes sense in principle, sometimes you have work experience that is gay-related and you are turned down for that. An Executive Member of the Queer Western Organization here at UWO had an anonymous letter sent to her from one of the organizations she applied to for a summer internship, telling her she wouldn't get a job for putting her experience in that club on her resume.

quote:

---

"It's about freedom to love who you damn well please"
Nothing stops that now.

---

quote:

---

"It's about not being called a faggot in your workplace."
A fist in the nose fixes that quite quickly.

---

quote:

---

It's about not being called a faggot in your workplace.

A fist in the nose fixes that quite quickly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:

None of your friggin' business.

---

True, but we have every right to be who we are and to live our lives as openly as heterosexuals do.

Our rights are not the right to live our lives in private as West Viking would like, but to live them in public, as heterosexuals do. I'm not interested in your sex life, and I'm pretty sure in you're not interested in mine. That doesn't mean, however, that I expect you to walk around pretending to be a eunuch who has never had a romantic or sexual relationship in his life.

People like West Viking, if they can't handle the fact that gay people exist and are going to live their lives the same way straight people do, should just stay home. There is no place for them in decent society.

If he had dared write this crap in a public email in my office he'd have been fired.

quote:

---

you can damn well bet that they would walk away needing rhinoplasty

---

Well at least now I know your fighting strategy should I ever decide to call you a fag. I'm not sure that's of much help to a 45 kg lesbian against a 100 kg male homophobe.

And what do you do if that person calling you a fag is your teacher, or your priest, or your MP? You don't remember what it was like. Larry Spencer is NOTHING compared to what used to be typical not very long ago.

The nutjobs over on FreakDominion think we hate heterosexuals and heterosexuality. Not true. We hate bigoted nutbars like... almost everyone there, but most of us have lots of heterosexual friends and family members who -- Imagine that -- don't spend their time spewing hatred.

They are going to shut their filthy mouths in the public realm or we are going to shut them for them, just as Preston Manning couldn't spew the anti-Semitic filth of his father and the Reform Party had to turn the overt racism and anti-Semitism of its Social Credit predecessor into the more socially-acceptable homophobia.

We know what it's like to be marginalized in society and to be treated like filth by mainstream society. They are not going to enjoy it.

Those who can't learn to accept, "Homosexuals are absolutely equal to heterosexuals IN LAW AND SOCIETY and Homosexual relationships are absolutely equal to heterosexuals relationships IN LAW AND SOCIETY, no matter how much *I* hate homosexuals and homosexuality and that's the price I must pay to live in a free society" are shit out of luck. They can shut up, they can leave the fucking country, but one thing is for sure -- they will not win. And if they don't accept that and shut their filthy mouths, they can take their place with Doug Christie and Jim Keegstra.

[ 23 January 2004: Message edited by: Newbie ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
Did the executive member of the QWO file charges?

---

Since the letter was anonymous, there was no way of tracking the source. As with most cases of this sort, it is difficult to prove that you were discriminated against.

Here's the Gazette's article on it. It was also covered in Xtra magazine in Toronto.

[ 23 January 2004: Message edited by: spatrioter ]

quote:

---

The reason it's offensive to call a gay person "not heterosexual" is because you're assuming that "heterosexual" is the correct standard, and "not heterosexual" as a deviation from that correct standard.

---

Nonsense. That's just you projecting what you think the poster believes.

quote:

---

If he is annoyed or inconvenienced by other people's desire for equality or freedom, then tough shit for him

---

I don't think it is the equality that bothers the author. It is having it shoved in his face. Of course, heterosexuals are also guilty of this, but that does not change the fact that he should not be forced to bow down at the PC altar any more than non-heterosexuals should be forced to pretend to be heterosexuals.

quote:

---

I don't get it...how can you have political correctness shoved down your throat?

---

Being told that your religeous beleifs are invalid because of what your holy book says about homosexuality. Being called a bigot when you complain about "gay pride", but slandering heterosexuals is okay. There are many ways in which PC-ness can be taken too far.

quote:

---

The reason it's offensive to call a gay person "not heterosexual" is because you're assuming that "heterosexual" is the correct standard, and "not heterosexual" as a deviation from that correct standard.

---

Why can't I consider heterosexual as a "correct standard", under the premise that it is my choice?. If other people want to live different lifestyles, then I don't really care; as long as they respect my choices, I will respect theirs.

quote:

---

I think that's his thesis. He's fine with them, so long as he can completely dismiss them, and doesn't have to tolerate their making claims of equality.

---

Does eqaulity mandate that we give non-heterosexual rights undue attention, or does equality simply require everyone to mind their own business and respect our differences and not make a big deal of it?

quote:

---

It's about being able to rent or buy the home of your choice.

It's about being considered equally when applying for employment.

It's about freedom to love who you damn well please.

It's about freedom to marry who you damn well please and having all the rights and privileges that go along with that(obligations also of course).

It's about not being called a faggot in your workplace.

It's about not being bashed.

It's about equal rights and an egalitarian society.

It's about common decency.

---

quote:

---

Gir, if you think West Viking isn't homophobic you are fucking nuts. Look at who's applauding him over there. All the freaking gay-hating nutbars.

---

I did not make any guarantees about WestViking's character in general, only that in this article although he seems angry, he does not appear to be hateful.

quote:

---

What I was saying is that sexual orientation is irrelevant to most jobs so if the employer asks it, tell them to flock off (politely, of course).

---

Bull. The minute you tell them to mind their own business they automatically assume that you're "one of them". A friend of mine was stripped of a job at a shelter because she had finally come out of the closet.

quote:

---

If someone called me a biggoted name like Faggot, Breeder, Whitey, or Nigger you can damn well bet that they would walk away needing rhinoplasty and a kiss from mommy.

---

That's great for you, but I consider myself non-violent and law abiding and really, don't have much of a chance of beating the heck out of anyone if I chose to, should they decide to be hateful were my mate a female.

quote:

---

Being told that your religeous beleifs are invalid because of what your holy book says about homosexuality.

---

I'm sorry, has there been a Canada wide announcement denoucing various faiths because they don't allow homosexuality??? I must have missed that?

quote:

---

Why can't I consider heterosexual as a "correct standard", under the premise that it is my choice?.

---

Because when you have a flock full of heterosexuals believing it is the "correct standard" you have a flock full of them being discriminatory. It's your standard, just as bisexuality is mine. Neither is "correct".

quote:

---

We have no reason to allow people who are not heterosexual to commit public acts that would have ordinary citizens facing sanctions for inappropriate public behaviour.

---

Obviously this guy has never seen a movie or walked down a street, or seen two teenagers groping in a park. However the difference is, that when a boy and girl make out, they don't have to worry about getting their skull's caved in.

Edited because I wasn't finished.

[ 23 January 2004: Message edited by: Shenanigans ]

[ 23 January 2004: Message edited by: Shenanigans ]

But really, there's no point discussing with you Heywood. You insist on disagreeing.

Perhaps, we should listen and defer our judgement to those who have been most aggrieved by homophobia instead of telling them what do to or how to interpret their experience of verbal or physical violence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
I don't think it is the equality that bothers the author. It is having it shoved in his face. Of course, heterosexuals are also guilty of this, but that does not change the fact that he should not be forced to bow down at the PC altar any more than non-heterosexuals should be forced to pretend to be heterosexuals.

---

quote:

---

Being told that your religeous beleifs are invalid because of what your holy book says about homosexuality. Being called a bigot when you complain about "gay pride", but slandering heterosexuals is okay. There are many ways in which PC-ness can be taken too far.

---

quote:

---

Why can't I consider heterosexual as a "correct standard", under the premise that it is my choice?. If other people want to live different lifestyles, then I don't really care; as long as they respect my choices, I will respect theirs.

---

quote:

---

Does eqaulity mandate that we give non-heterosexual rights undue attention, or does equality simply require everyone to mind their own business and respect our differences and not make a big deal of it?

---

quote:

---

True equality allows all of thsoe things. And that is what I think WestViking is calling for- equality, not priority for non-heterosexuals.

---

Why not have Heterosexual pride day? I don't see how this conflicts with Gay Pride, which to me always seems like a very open party.

I don't see any homosexuals stopping heterosexual pride. As long as neither is potrayed at "better", what's the problem?

quote:

---

Sometimes a simple problem (biggoted verbal assault) calls for a simple solution (delivering a righteous beating unto the wrongdoer).

---

The arrogance and plain stupidity of the Canaidan Alliance-ites.

What is this bitching about "extra rights" for homosexuals? I'm sorry, but all of the human rights protections being given based on sexual orientation also apply to heterosexuals.

This "special rights" argument from the right-woingers is just an indication of their inability to think logically.

Heterosexuals already have the privileges to visit their dying partner in the hospital, to access pension benefits of their partner. All the "special rights" laws do is EXTEND these already-existing heterosexual perogatives to gays and lesbians.

Like giving the vote to women. Except by Preston Manning-style logic, giving women the vote is "special rights".

And what is this about having PC-ness "shoved down your throat"?

Yeah, life's hard. Having to flip through an occassional gay show on TV. In between the eight bizillion commericals and shows geared for heterosexuals.

And, as far as Freedominion logic goes, I am sure there are thousands of bigots out there who resent having to serve and interact with niggers, christkillers and japs. But does that mean that allowing non-whites to sit at the front of the bus is an unacceptable, "politically correct" intrusion?

By FreeDominion gay rights logic, those Coloreds should just keep to themsleves, stay out of "our" way.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FPTP:
About gay pride:

Why not have Heterosexual pride day? I don't see how this conflicts with Gay Pride, which to me always seems like a very open party.

I don't see any homosexuals stopping heterosexual pride. As long as neither is potrayed at "better", what's the problem?

Why not celebrate sexuality? Why do we leave it to the mainstream/expliotative advertising/movie/music/magazine industry?

---

But people aren't like that and made the language fit accordingly. If you so choose, there is a distinction; hetero, homo, bi, metro, pomo..whatever sexual you desire to be.

I don't see how calling a spade a spade is political correctness gone awry. I'm not about to call a cat "not a dog" because I don't like them or find them un-reasonable. A cat is a cat whether I despise it or not, and I respect my cat-loving peers' rights to keep them and subscribe to Cat Fancy. Who does it hurt?

If WestViking doesn't like the Pride Parades, no one is forcing him/her to go or watch. Protecting "the minors and children" is a pretty hackneyed defence, in my opinion. As a child and especially as a minor I was doing much "worse" things than watching men dress up as women, or lesbian bikers drive down the street. Big deal. Is Halloween degenerate too? Or is that just good clean fun? There isn't much of a distinction to me. People dress up, so what? Children also walk in on their parents doing the nasty, does that warp them? Is that so much better than a few kisses here and there at the Pride Parade? I don't think so. Anyway, PDAs have never been a bugboo with me, but to each their own.

WestViking is right about "alleged rights". I would be majorly PO'd if I as a hypothetical gay person, was in a long term relationship with another taxpayer, had raised a few future taxpayers and the government couldn't be bushed to recognize my contributions and legitimacy as a person just because of who I chose to spend my life with. Heck, me and my partner paid the salaries of some of those fatcats! Where's mine?

Shoot, I'm saying this *anyway* as a straight person, so I can't begin to imagine the cold fury that the gay population feels.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
A fist in the nose fixes that quite quickly.

---

Spatrioter, you handle quite well for a lad of your age.

Gir, if this is all so important to you, maybe you should be posting on another board.

quote:

---

Why not have Heterosexual pride day?

---

Because heterosexuals aren't necessarily proud of their sexuality, at least not as far as the sex part is concerned. Certainly we "celebrate" romanticized love, and the making of babies, but I think if you threw a "Straight Pride Day" and expected heterosexuals to pile, half-clothed, onto floats, to dance and celebrate the pleasures of the flesh, you'd be disappointed.

We could, however, mount a pretty snazzy "Straight Shame day parade, with float themes like "Masturbation — Yes, There Is Something Wrong With You!", "Save It For Your Soulmate... Or Forever!" and "Missionary: It Was Enough For Your Parents, It's Enough For You". Sombre marchers in trenchcoats would be followed by chaperones, maintaining "at least a foot" between participants. Colourless signs and banners could read "Ewww, Gross", "Maybe Another Time" and "You Want To Put That Where?". The event would culminate in a nice buffet dinner, a speech about the evils of lust, and then home for a good night's sleep.

quote:

---

Just mention the word "vagina" to many straight guys and they get all awkward .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by googlymoogly:
I wonder if it works the other way around. Hmm....*says 'penis' out loud*. Well...penises are funny things.

---

quote:

---

We could, however, mount a pretty snazzy "Straight Shame day parade, with float themes like "Masturbation — Yes, There Is Something Wrong With You!", "Save It For Your Soulmate... Or Forever!" and "Missionary: It Was Enough For Your Parents, It's Enough For You". Sombre marchers in trenchcoats would be followed by chaperones, maintaining "at least a foot" between participants. Colourless signs and banners could read "Ewww, Gross", "Maybe Another Time" and "You Want To Put That Where?". The event would culminate in a nice buffet dinner, a speech about the evils of lust, and then home for a good night's sleep.

---

Tell me about it. When I was in high school, three people came to talk to us about celibacy. They spoke about how terrible sexually transmitted diseases were and how condoms sometimes didn't work. One girl spoke about rape. They ended by saying that masturbation was selfish. They used the word pure over and over again. The group said that they had no religious affiliations whatsoever. I don't believe that. I can understand promoting celibacy as a choice, but denying us masturbation is just ridiculous. If your never going to have sex, you need to get rid of the sexual tension in some way. I'm wondering if those people had their libidos removed at birth. Oh yeah, they also said erotic magazines were degrading. Jesus! Do they actually believe that a bunch of Horney teenagers are going to toe that particular party line?

[ 25 January 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

I remember one day we were having a discussion about rape. One girl was determined to ram down our throats some hackneyed, Dr. Laura-type crap about how the woman secretly wanted to be abused, something about how it made her feel "wanted" or something like that. Another girl spoke up about her won rape experience, burst into tears and began shouting, as the rest of us shifted awkwardly in our seats .

[ 25 January 2004: Message edited by: googlymoogly ]

quote:

---

We were sex-segregated for the sex ed stuff; we learned to put a condom on a guy...

---

When we learned about sex in grade seven, they showed us this extremely boring filmstrip which provided information on the basics of reproduction and nothing else. I don't think I saw a diaphragm or condom once. And they didn't cover any of the interesting stuff. Afterwards they separated the boys and girls into groups and two teachers were assigned to talk to us about boy stuff and girl stuff. As a result, I came away knowing next to nothing about female sexuality. Our school system has fallen flat on its ass as far as sex ed is concerned. No wonder STDs are on the rise.

[ 25 January 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

I don't like the word "penis". Or "vagina". Both are too clinical. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a happy medium. You either get clinical words or crude words or overly flowery words.

---

In old england, apparently, the word cunt was quite common and very positive. It came from the same root as country, meaning "bountiful opening". It was used as an expression for women, in a complementary way (a fine pair of cunts they were). Now, it has become co-opted by the misogynists to become a nasty word, an expletive and an insult. A shame really. The word vagina, on the other hand, is a latin word that meant "sheath for a sword"(ych!), and it is this that has passed down to us as the "accepted" term for the female genitalia. Everyone says it is merely clinical, but if you know its history, it's quite offensive. It just goes to show how deeply patriarchy is still messing us up.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jacob Two-Two:
For my daughter, I have taught her the word "yoni". I'm not sure of the implications (I know it's used in the Kama Sutra), but I thought it sounded pleasant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
They spoke about how terrible sexually transmitted diseases were and how condoms sometimes didn't work.

---

In one of my high school religion classes, the teacher said condoms didn't work AT ALL against sexually transmitted diseases. He said they only prevented pregnancy, and weren't very effective at that.

And every year they invited some woman from a pro-life group to perform a brainwashing session. Thankfully, a pro-choice girl and I were in the front row, and she got frustrated with us many times.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hinterland:
You know gay men have a completely different reaction to the word "vagina". I laugh whenever I hear it. I even start laughing when someone starts talking about the capital of Saskatchewan. Is that sexist?

..anyone? Newbie?

---

I don't know if it's sexist or not, but my sister laughed when we were teaching her the provincial capitals and got to Saskatchewan.

Of course she was five at the time. Things didn't improve when she was told it was named for the queen. (The thought of the queen on the toilet is still one I can't quite picture)

As a result, I'm pretty neutral about the word vagina itself, but Regina is a hoot.

Either way, he's a little too Yonge for Coxwell.

[ 26 January 2004: Message edited by: albireo ]

Q: Do you like Kipling?

quote:

---

I presume you're saying that people should never let on to prospective employers that they're gay.

---

Sorry guys, but I want to drag this thread back on to topic.

Is it standard practice for employers to ask questions about sexuality. Do they get to look at your marriage certificate? I agree a person shouldn't be denied employment because they worked with the Rainbow Coalition, but surely a prospective employer can't ask you whether your gay during a job interview. Can they?

quote:

---

I agree a person shouldn't be denied employment because they worked with the Rainbow Coalition, but surely a prospective employer can't ask you whether your gay during a job interview. Can they?

---

No, they can't. Not even if you're applying for a job at a gay nightclub. Or rather, they're not supposed to.

quote:

---

I just assumed from my experience of jock-talk that str8 men would chat about vaginas all the time when boasting to their male friends. But they probably substitute another term like "pussy".

---

quote:

---

I am tired of ‘gay parades’ and misplaced “pride” in vulgar displays of obscene sexuality unsuited to public displays to a general audience that includes minors and children. We have no reason to allow people who are not heterosexual to commit public acts that would have ordinary citizens facing sanctions for inappropriate public behaviour.

---

Not homophobic? Bullshit. West Viking is basically saying : "fuck off feminists, niggers, jews, faggots... fuck off, get off my street, outta the office, off the TV... you're 'polluting my personal space'... my personal space being the PUBLIC DOMAIN because it's mine and only mine. I might not have any fucking clue what a gay pride parade looks like or the symbolic or actual meaning of it, but I do know that it must be another one of those deviant, uncalled for, DEE-scusting special interest displays that should NOT be tolerated in MY society and MY public space".

quote:

---

I don't know if it's sexist or not, but my sister laughed when we were teaching her the provincial capitals and got to Saskatchewan.

Of course she was five at the time. Things didn't improve when she was told it was named for the queen. (The thought of the queen on the toilet is still one I can't quite picture)

---

If you check the records for the old NWT legislature, back when the west was part of the NWT you will be able to find a series of heated debates over the territorial capital.

[ 13 February 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]

quote:

---

I never think of the word "vagina" when I hear "Regina". I don't know why - maybe because the word "vagina" hasn't really been one that I've used much during my life. My parents weren't into the teaching-the-kid-the-clinical-name-for-genitalia thing, so I didn't really use the term much either as a kid or as an adult. So when I hear "Regina" it doesn't evoke anything but "capital of Saskatchewan" for me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

I really enjoyed this piece. Cutting through the PC garbage without being homophobic, WestViking has pretty much hit the nail on the head in my opinion. Though I am interested to see some other perspectives on it...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Newbie:

Those who can't learn to accept, "Homosexuals are absolutely equal to heterosexuals IN LAW AND SOCIETY and Homosexual relationships are absolutely equal to heterosexuals relationships IN LAW AND SOCIETY, no matter how much *I* hate homosexuals and homosexuality and that's the price I must pay to live in a free society" are shit out of luck. They can shut up, they can leave the fucking country, but one thing is for sure -- they will not win. And if they don't accept that and shut their filthy mouths, they can take their place with Doug Christie and Jim Keegstra.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

Being told that your religeous beleifs are invalid because of what your holy book says about homosexuality. Being called a bigot when you complain about "gay pride", but slandering heterosexuals is okay. There are many ways in which PC-ness can be taken too far.[/URL].

---

Gir—

Until and unless Canada becomes a theocracy, ANY religious person who spouts off from their "holy book" to tell me I'm evil, or perverted, or immoral, etc. etc. will be told to shove that BOOK up their rectum. It might be "holy" to them, but it sure isn't to me.

Until and unless those self-same folks advocate applying EVERY rule from their so-called "holy book" equally and without favour— ie: stoning adulterers, killing those who charge usury (bankers), selling the sons of those defeated in wartime into slavery and raping their wives and daughters, ad nauseum— then I will continue to call them bigots and that they can shove their moldy old book up their rectum.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
ugh, I must've been in quite a sour mood to actually have written that. I wonder if I was drinking that day...

---

Don't worry about it, Gir. It provoked a good discussion in any case. Besides...often things sound perfectly reasonable until you hear other perspectives. I have often held a position until someone comes along and deconstructs it in a way that I hadn't thought about - and then later I think, "How could I have THOUGHT that?"

quote:

---

Originally posted by albireo:
It sure beats Shakespeare's "sulphurous pit" (King Lear, IV, vi).

---